Scott Alexander argues that misusing terms like 'democratic' and 'accountable' can inadvertently justify totalitarianism, and suggests more careful usage of these terms. Longer summary

Scott Alexander critiques the misuse of terms like 'democratic' and 'accountable', arguing that when taken to extremes, they can justify totalitarianism. He illustrates this through examples in religious freedom, charitable donations, and AI development, showing how demands for complete 'democracy' or 'accountability' in all aspects of life can lead to the erosion of personal freedoms. The post suggests that these terms should be used more carefully, with 'democratic' applied mainly to government structures and 'accountable' reserved for specific power dynamics, to avoid inadvertently promoting totalitarian ideas. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander examines Matt Yglesias's public predictions and discusses the implications for evaluating pundits and the future of prediction-based journalism. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses Matt Yglesias's recent foray into making public predictions, a practice uncommon among pundits. He compares Yglesias's predictions to those on Metaculus and reflects on the broader implications for journalism and punditry. Scott explores the challenges of fairly evaluating pundits based on predictions, the artificiality of predetermined prediction sets, and the disconnect between prediction accuracy and valuable commentary. He suggests that pundits should make predictions directly related to their claims and proposes using prediction markets as a benchmark for pundit performance. Shorter summary