Most (but not all) of my writings are published here on Less Wrong. You can find links to everything I write by visiting my blog lsusr.com. You can subscribe to my posts via RSS.
I think this post is interesting as a historical document. I think it would be interesting to look back at this post in 2050 with the benefits of hindsight.
I like that this post addresses a topic that is underrepresented on Less Wrong and does so in a concise technical manner approachable to non-specialists. It makes accurate claims. The author understands how drawing (and drawing pedagogy) works.
I like this post because it following its advice has improved my quality of life.
Thank you for the link to my 2020 upvotes. I didn't know that was a thing. It brings the preliminary voting up from "super inconvenient" to "convenient".
It seems to me that their priority is find a pipeline that scales. Scaling competitions are frequently long-tailed, which makes them winner-take-all. A winner-take-all system has the bonus benefit of centralized control. They only have to talk to a small number of people. Working through a single distributor is easier than wrangling a hundred different authors directly.
Does your offer include annotating your thoughts too or does it only include writing the prompts?
That's a good question. I think the answer is "no" because each Western power had lots of rivals.
The Cold War was a different story. In the Cold War, there were (in theory) only two opposing sides. The USA would fund basically anyone who opposed the USSR (and vice versa).
You're not wrong. Context does indeed matter. Few systems fall perfectly into first-strike vs second-strike.
I wanted to give readers the experience of what it was like for me to read the book.