Sorted by New

Wiki Contributions


One thing that bothers me about this text is the combination of the claim that the issue is important enough to risk nuclear war with the implicit claim that the issue is not important enough to increase reading comprehension by following common sensibilities about talking about nuclear war.

You want to make politicians understand, you want to make people understand who are from cultures very much less direct than the US. If it is really a matter of life-and-death for all humanity, I would expect you not to reason with the authority of Orwell and Heinlein that it is just fine to ignore how other people communicate.

Yes, your text does not endorse dropping nukes on AI server farms. However, it is not surprising at all that people read it that way.

There is a story in a book by Sten Nadolny where the protagonist is on a plane and tries to convince a stewardess as fast as possible of the correct fact that the pilot is going to make a fatal mistake. He realizes that "as fast as possible" means "as slow as necessary to not be disregarded as a hysteric".