> Direct question: do you know what this claim of me cancelling Siskind could mean, since OP doesn't seem able to answer? That I'm not sure on: I wasn't asking

> Direct question: do you know what this claim of me cancelling Siskind could mean, since OP doesn't seem able to answer? That I'm not sure on: I wasn't asking to accuse you of cancelling Siskind, I was asking to hear your description of the events. Given you have actual descriptions of events in a chronology, I tend to believe your story on this one. > Also, wtf it has to do with Buterin. Well, nothing--it was an ad hominem attack on you by the poster. It's Hacker News: a lot of people here are capitalist to the point of sociopathy, and will defend any money making venture even if it means abandoning ethics, logic, evidence, and/or social acceptability. You lost the respect of most of Hacker News, but have you seen the guys these people respect? > Siskind is certainly one of the "There are a million of these guys, and they all have long and wordy blogs" reasoners from first principles rather than knowing things that I was talking about in the linked post, but there are (as I say) a heck of a lot of them. I don't get the feel that Siskind was just reasoning from first principles--that was some of what he did on SSC, but I do think he knew a lot as well (and, given he has a doctorate, there's at least a few people who agree on that point). If anything, I think what I got a lot of from SSC was the opposite: using knowledge to figure out what the first principles are. As for there being a lot of these guys and a lot of words: I'm not sure why I should care about either of these criticisms.