Scott responds to comments on his Scott Adams obituary, defending his mixed tone while making some updates based on feedback about Adams' podcast reach and influence. Longer summary

Scott Alexander responds to comments on his Scott Adams obituary, addressing criticisms about the post's timing and tone, defending his characterization of Adams' interest in manipulation, discussing the reach of Adams' podcast, and (reluctantly) clarifying his position on Adams' controversial race-related comments. The post includes updates acknowledging that Adams' podcast was more influential than initially stated and that his manipulation techniques coexisted with genuine helpfulness to many people. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander attempts to replicate a poll claiming high rates of COVID vaccine deaths, finds much lower rates, and concludes such polls are unreliable due to bias. Longer summary

Scott Alexander attempts to replicate a poll claiming high rates of COVID vaccine-related deaths. He conducts his own survey and finds much lower rates, investigates possible reasons for the discrepancy, and concludes that such polls are unreliable due to political bias and statistical misunderstanding. Scott's survey shows 0.6% of respondents reporting a vaccine-related death in their family, compared to 8.5% in the original poll. He follows up with respondents who reported deaths, finding most cases involve elderly individuals, and the numbers are consistent with normal death rates. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander critiques Glen Weyl's anti-technocracy essay, arguing for a more nuanced view of formal mechanisms in decision-making and defending rationalist approaches. Longer summary

Scott Alexander critiques Glen Weyl's essay 'Why I Am Not A Technocrat', arguing that Weyl's definition of technocracy is incoherent and his examples don't fit his own definition. Scott breaks down the concept of technocracy into several axes, including top-down vs. bottom-up, mechanism vs. judgment, and expert vs. popular opinion. He argues that formal mechanisms can be valuable in preventing bias and corruption, using examples like district creation and college admissions. Scott also defends the rationalist and effective altruism communities against Weyl's criticisms, highlighting their successes in areas like pandemic preparedness. He concludes that while critiques of technocracy are important, it's crucial to avoid oversimplifying the issue and to recognize that sometimes technocratic approaches can be beneficial. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander argues against criticism of billionaire philanthropy, citing its efficiency, positive impact, and ability to support important causes that governments often neglect. Longer summary

Scott Alexander argues against criticizing billionaire philanthropy, presenting several points: 1) Criticizing philanthropy more than luxury spending incentivizes the wrong behavior. 2) The potential good done by philanthropy outweighs concerns about inequality. 3) Billionaire donations often receive more scrutiny than praise. 4) Government spending is often less efficient and focused on important causes than private philanthropy. 5) Philanthropy can support pluralism and fund important work the government won't. 6) Centralized government control risks a single point of failure. He concludes that the immense good done by philanthropic efforts, such as saving millions of lives, outweighs concerns about democratic accountability or inequality. Shorter summary

Scott examines claims that political parties should focus on base turnout rather than appealing to moderates, finding evidence that extreme candidates decrease turnout and swing voters matter. Longer summary

This post analyzes the claim that political parties should focus on turning out their base rather than appealing to moderates. Scott examines research and data on voter behavior, finding that extreme candidates tend to decrease turnout for their own party and that swing voters can be decisive in close elections. He concludes that the evidence does not support the 'win-by-extremism-turning-out-the-base' argument. While acknowledging that non-centrist candidates like Trump can win, Scott argues this is by appealing to new coalitions rather than just moving to ideological extremes. The post evaluates academic studies, exit polls, and analysis by political commentators to reach these conclusions. Shorter summary

A collection of interesting links from early 2017 covering drugs, education, politics, science and history, with Scott's commentary on each. Longer summary

This is a links post where Scott Alexander shares various interesting articles and studies he's come across. The post covers a wide range of topics including new drug developments, education statistics, political events around Trump's presidency, scientific discoveries, and historical curiosities. The format follows a typical links post structure with brief commentary on each link, often adding context or witty observations. Many items focus on current events from early 2017, including Trump administration policies and European political trends. Shorter summary

This post systematically rebuts common Reactionary political beliefs on topics like societal decline, traditional governance, progress, and social issues through data analysis and historical examples. Longer summary

This post is an extensive rebuttal to common beliefs held by the Reactionary political movement. It systematically addresses and counters Reactionary claims about societal decline, traditional monarchies, the origins and nature of progress, corporate governance models, and modern views on race and gender. The author analyzes data and historical examples to argue against Reactionary positions, while acknowledging some valid critiques and interesting ideas within the movement. The post ends by listing various rebuttals and responses to the FAQ itself from Reactionary bloggers. Shorter summary