EDIT: I'm wrong, Scott Alexander is just his pen name. The article also calls the author "Scott _____" instead of just "the author of S.S.C.". Wasn't this exa

EDIT: I'm wrong, Scott Alexander is just his pen name. The article also calls the author "Scott _____" instead of just "the author of S.S.C.". Wasn't this exactly what he was trying to prevent with the NYT in the first place? So now other journalists feel like they have to step in and "doxx" him instead? And this New Yorker article ultimately got published in spite of all the controversy surrounding his identity. What kind of backlash is that going to generate? On top of the reaction to all the other veiled attacks on people in the article and irrelevant detours into "controversial" details about SSC and the rationalist community, etc. I don't see a good outcome to this at all. Maybe it says something if the people who put the most effort into overcoming bias and trying to foster reasoned conversation couldn't prevent all of this from blowing up as it did. Maybe it doesn't. I don't know. It's certainly ugly.