Will Eliezer Yudkowsky talk like a normal person before 2030?

Eliezer uses a very idiosyncratic phraseology and tends to assume a lot of shared context from his conversation partner. This works fine with other enfranchised rationalists, but makes it very difficult for him to be understood when speaking to a general audience.

For example, in the Destiny vs. Eliezer debate, Destiny took care to use common words and simple, concise descriptions. Eliezer by contrast would use various terms-of-art and subclture references that many audience members (and even Destiny himself) wouldn't understand, and would give long rambling vague answers that made people think he was dodging the question.

If I find a relatively technical discussion of Eliezer's, lasting at least a half hour, where he does a better job of communicating in a way that won't be off-putting to most educated English speakers, I'll resolve this to YES. Otherwise it resolves to NO.

Given how subjective this is, I won't bet.

Other atypical aspects of his communication aren't important. For example he also tends to act rather arorgant and make poorly-received jokes, but neither of those needs to change in order for this market to resolve YES.

Get Ṁ600 play money
Sort by:

Have you seen this interview Eliezer did with congressman Dan Crenshaw?

It's been a while since I watched it but I remember being impressed with his communication and thinking he did a much better job than usual explaining his ideas in a way that someone unfamiliar with the topic could understand.

1) This has to be a conversation or can it be a presentation?

2) Do Eliezer's past communication attempts also qualify?

how do you feel about his writing? I believe his ideas becomes more legible as he's had more time to prepare the wording.

Ah the incomprehensibility bluff! I knew it

the irony: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/9a5cZA7ekBCGbZ6T8/the-incomprehensibility-bluff