[ExI] "Crypto Coin Law" vs "Law of the Crypto Coin"?

[Brent Allsop]

Yes, exactly Anders!

That is why I am always asking everyone what it would take to convert 
you to my, or the other camp, and I work on considering the same for 
myself.  That is always the focus of canonizer.com - testability in this 
way.   I'm always encouraging all camps to explicitly state what it 
would take to convert them to  another camp, along with their 
rationality for why they can't currently accept the other camp.  
Everyone knowing and being educated about this for all competing camps, 
is also a good strategy that helps, significantly, when trying to find 
and build as much consensus as possible, on critically important moral 
and existential risk things, ore more importantly knowing exactly what 
is required to most efficiently and creatively get everyone all that 
they really want.

Much of what I hear Gordon and James saying is untestable meaningless 
negative noise, which I've explained over and over about why I can't 
accept - arguments like:   There has never been a sure thing investment 
in the past, so there will never be a sure investment - all hogwash that 
I can't accept, for the reason's I've stated.  They always try to weasel 
out and never answer my questions about what it would take to convert 
them, or what their predictions are, if they are any different than the 
emerging evidence for the 'law' like expert consensus here:

http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/154/2

Brent


On 8/8/2013 8:47 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote:
> On 2013-08-09 04:35, Brent Allsop wrote:
>>
>> We are obviously spending LOTS of time and effort on this 
>> conversation.Do you find it worth while?It feels to me like at best 
>> this infinite yes / no /' yes / no, forever conversation is just a 
>> complete bleating noise waste of time.
>>
>
> I just listened to a talk about argumentation games, and it seems 
> relevant. It even included an infinite linear argument game where 
> argument 1 disputes argument 0, argument 2 dispites 1, and so on. This 
> game is never ending and indeterminate: there is no winner nor any 
> conclusion. However, if we want to end the discussion (or rather, make 
> it more productive), what about this:
>
> "What is the simplest piece of evidence that, if you got it, would 
> change your mind about your current position?"
>
> If there isn't any, then you are likely crazy or lack imagination. If 
> there is one, maybe it is worth checking if it exists.
>
> -- 
> Dr Anders Sandberg
> Future of Humanity Institute
> Oxford Martin School
> Oxford University
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20130808/b3029581/attachment.html>