http://teodesian.net//posts/ce5f0ad8-8ba3-4f6d-b438-1f3c3167c4e3?format=xml teodesian.net : /posts/ce5f0ad8-8ba3-4f6d-b438-1f3c3167c4e3 en 2026-04-16T17:29:25 2026-04-16T17:29:25 /favicon.ico http://teodesian.net 32 32 teodesian.net favicon http://teodesian.net/posts/ce5f0ad8-8ba3-4f6d-b438-1f3c3167c4e3 I’m not really sure what to do here. How do you review a book that has a glaring omission, but also its author has written an essay called Here’s Why I Like Glaring Omissions And Think Everyone Should Have Them? Is it dishonest? Some sort of special super-meta-honesty? How many stars do you take off? Nothing in my previous history of book-reviewing has prepared me for this question. Of course he's unprepared for reality, being a "rationalist/bayesian". They deny the implications of the Frame problem, which is their core error. I should write a blog post about this; it's why racism and all the concerns discussed are straight-up spooks. You might be able to walk a mile in another mans shoes, but you can't walk with his feet.]]> doge http://teodesian.net/posts/ce5f0ad8-8ba3-4f6d-b438-1f3c3167c4e3 2024-05-01T17:04:43