From: Felipe Barros Corrêa de Oliveira (felipeahura@gmail.com)
Date: Thu May 12 2011 - 22:06:34 MDT
My name is Felipe Barros, I`m Brazilian, 26 years old.
I joined the ML right before this closure debate.
So, should I head to Less Wrong?
Any other places I should visit?
I couldn't find a single place to learn about the singularity in Brazilian
Portuguese, so I want to build a website in the near future.
My goal now is to improve my scope of all things singularity, and also key
people.
By the way, the SL4 website was a valuable gift, thanks a lot for it.
This is like "Hi, goodbye", but I don't want to loose contact. To read your
discussions is of key importance to me now.
Thanks
Felipe Barros
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 7:38 PM, Gwern Branwen <gwern0@gmail.com> wrote:
> Theorizing that list closure might be of interest to LW, I posted
>
> http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/5n2/sl4_meta_list_closure_2_month_followup/
> There are 19 comments on that page (including mine) versus 6 or 7
> here. Apparently even LW cares more about SL4 than SL4 does. On a side
> note, the only other non-closure non-Burton email since was a pointer
> by Anissimov to... a page on LW.
>
> On Mon May 09 2011 - 21:34:49 MDT, Randall Randall
> (randall@randallsquared.com) wrote:
> > * But, I am greatly against losing the archives. Just to be clear. Maybe
> they're mirrored on lesswrong.com or somewhere?
>
> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 6:27 PM, Tim Freeman <tim@fungible.com> wrote:
> > At this point, I agree, so long as they keep the archives up.
>
> You're not the only ones to think I meant shutting down the website as
> well; I thought I was clear, but apparently I was not:
>
> http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/5n2/sl4_meta_list_closure_2_month_followup/452j
>
> Short summary: I'm talking about the email list, not whatever web
> server archives there may be. As far as I care, Eliezer can keep the
> HTML archive pages on sl4.org up until the Singularity.
>
> A static site avoids most/all of my criticisms, and would be useful in
> showing up in Google results or providing a convenient viewing medium
> for emails I might select if I ever get around to reading through the
> archives.*
>
> Providing a tarball or importing into Google Groups
> (
> http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/5n2/sl4_meta_list_closure_2_month_followup/45ct
> )
> are both nice to have, but strictly speaking, not *necessary*.
>
> *
> http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/5n2/sl4_meta_list_closure_2_month_followup/452r
>
> On Tue May 10 2011 - 06:04:32 MDT, Toby Weston (LordLobster@yahoo.com)
> wrote:
> > In my opinion it would be a shame to see it closed.
>
> I think it would be a shame for it to continue in its senility,
> personally. ('shame' is an empty word that cuts both ways.)
>
> Is there any reason to keep it open besides sheer nostalgia?
>
> On Mon May 09 2011 - 21:34:49 MDT, Randall Randall
> (randall@randallsquared.com) wrote:
> > If a ML is not being used, and therefore presents no cognitive or server
> load, why bother inactivating it? It's a potentially useful thing that would
> require work to dispose of.
>
> I disagree. At the bare minimum, the domain name has to be paid for. A
> list server requires active hosting, while static HTML does not (the
> cost difference can be striking). A separate OS running a mail server
> is a large security surface, which requires nontrivial amounts of
> someone's time to keep running - and if said sysadmin time is *not*
> invested, then the server is a security bomb. The existence of an
> 'active' mailing list occupies mental space, adds overhead, and
> divides a community that is already too divided; does it do so to a
> huge extent? Of course not, but there's still a little friction there.
>
> (Thought experiment: if you think that SL4 adds zero friction or
> overhead or other negative factors, would you support a division of
> SL4 into 16 different mailing lists focusing on different aspects?
> Would you regard a counterfactual world in which SL4 had been started
> as 16 different lists as a world that was more, less, or equally
> efficient as the present one?)
>
> On Tue May 10 2011 - 22:53:29 MDT, Mark Nuzzolilo (nuzz604@gmail.com)
> wrote:
> > Don't you have better things to do?
>
> How SL4 has fallen.
>
> --
> gwern
> http://www.gwern.net
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:01:05 MDT