> I thought so too. But it's hard not to notice that this article was supposedly in the work for many months, yet reads as if it took a day's worth of work (bei

> I thought so too. But it's hard not to notice that this article was supposedly in the work for many months, yet reads as if it took a day's worth of work (being generous). Why did it disappear for months and then come out shortly after Scott Alexander poked his head above the parapet again? That timing is awfully suspicious. Not really, he made himself relevant again by relaunching his blog. And it's weird to assume they were continuously slaving away on this story since this kerfuffle started, polishing it to perfection. They probably just shelved it in a draft state and moved on to new things. When it because relevant again, spent a little time dusting it off and updating it, then shipped. My understanding is this story isn't even that long for this kind of thing, and it ran on a Saturday (which IIRC is the least read edition of the week). This story is BIG NEWS in the Rationalist subculture and adjacent communities, and a small blip pretty much everywhere else.