Comment by toothpaste on Applause Lights · 2021-01-30T03:11:25.490Z · LW · GW

It's hard to judge this particular case without context, but such sentences can be valid if they convey a general direction a person wants something to move on in a situation where they can't or shouldn't be overspecific, for example if they don't know much about the specific subject, or if they want to remain on topic during a talk about a particular issue.

For example, I could say "it's time someone developed a machine that is able to fetch things around the house and bring them to us". It doesn't mean I know anything about engineering or about how this machine would operate, just that I think it would be a good thing.

In the same way, the speaker might just have wanted to say that they believe that it would be good if AI development went in two directions: 1-Multinational 2-Democratic. That did not involve them claiming they were an expert in developing democratic frameworks for international decision making. He was just expressing that it should move in the direction of those ideals, maybe because he liked the outcome of other projects who shared them, like the Human Genome Project.

Comment by toothpaste on Pretending to be Wise · 2021-01-30T02:36:55.220Z · LW · GW

Paolo Freire

You mean Paulo Freire!

Comment by toothpaste on Why Truth? · 2021-01-29T01:53:53.675Z · LW · GW

Most apostrophe removals didnt cause any problems, but the "were" in the paragraph before the last one had me confused for a split second.

Comment by toothpaste on Burdensome Details · 2021-01-25T22:21:48.829Z · LW · GW

One of the reasons I was having trouble with the Reagan example when I was reading this for the first time was that I was interpreting it as

“Reagan will provide federal support for unwed mothers AND cut federal support to local governments” is more probable than “Reagan will provide federal support for unwed mothers AND NOT cut federal support to local governments”.

The fact that in one option one of the the sentences was present and in the other option it wasn't made me think that the fact that it was not present made it implicit that it would NOT happen, when it wasn't the case.

I wonder how common is that line of reasoning.