I fuck with good longform content but I need to know if he's a massive chud going in.
Started this article on libertarians and it seems pretty good ngl
He is the I am very smart person in school who fails to understand what they read and contrast things with each other. He thinks he is very smart and fails to see that others could correct him. If you know people from the field he sometimes blogs about you will hear them dunking on him hard.
He is a good example of a wrong behavior Popper noted, to take one concept you came up with cause it was convincing to you doesn't mean it is right or better than alternatives. He doesn't accept falsification of his believes and moves goal posts miles and miles. Also generates himself to be a victim.
Well, this has been wholly illuminating and saved me from wasting a ton of time on his BS. Thanks all
He's a technocratic lib with some nice posts you'll occasionally want to throw against the wall in frustration. He's desperately confused (he admits DM utterly eludes him) and is brainwormed by the offshoots of Yudkowskianism but his heart's in the right place amd he has some long form pieces that are really very good.
He's got a lot of chuds of the NRx type following him though because he takes the view people are arguing in good faith. This leads to some utterly awful takes on the Bell Curve etc.
Here is a good essay that talks about his horrible beliefs and does a close reading of two of his essays to reveal how Siskind hides bad arguments behind his writing style.
