Aye, the user-assessment model is kind of interesting, but agreed.
When I think "who can explain complex things in relateable terms?", my
answer has never been (and will never be) Bayesians.
On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 10:53 PM, Craig Franklin
> They have correctly identified that a lot of our articles on scientific
> concepts are jargon-filled babble that is unintelligible to anyone who
> isn't already an expert in the field (and if they're an expert, why are
> they consulting an encyclopaedia?), but I'm not that confident that
> Yudkowsky of all people is going to be able to penetrate that and be able
> to explain complex concepts at the level of a layperson.
> I will confess that the software looks interesting though.
> On 14 March 2016 at 11:03, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Being put together by Eliezer Yudkowsky of LessWrong. Content is
>> cc-by-sa 3.0, don't know about the software.
>> Rather than the "encyclopedia" approach, it tries to be more
>> pedagogical, teaching the reader at their level.
>> Analysis from a sometime Yudkowsky critic on Tumblr:
>> (there's a pile more comments linked from the notes on that post,
>> mostly from quasi-fans; I have an acerbic comment in there, but you
>> should look at the site yourself first.)
>> No idea if this will go anywhere, but might be of interest; new
>> approaches generally are. They started in December, first publicised
>> it a week ago and have been scaling up. First day it collapsed due to
>> load from a Facebook post announcement ... so maybe hold off before
>> announcing it everywhere :-)
>> - d.
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> New messages to: Wikimediaemail@example.com
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> New messages to: Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
New messages to: Wikimediaemail@example.com