Rationalist check-list:
- Incorrect use of analogy? Check.
- Pseudoscientific nonsense used to make your point seem more profound? Check.
- Tortured use of probability estimates? Check.
- Over-long description of a point that could just have easily been made in 1 sentence? Check.
This email by SBF is basically one big malapropism.
The most charitable reading of this is that, removed from context, it is an attempt to bridge some kind of gap (i.e. an “uncanny valley”) between two companies, that gap being some amalgamation of communication issues, values differences, work styles, really just every aspect of a company’s identity. So it’s fucking hilarious that he has chosen to write this doc using the most esoteric, faux-philosophical, alienating drivel possible.
WITH context, however, it is even more absurd. It’s still the above, with an extra undercoat of trying to resolve a love triangle between at least two rat-dorks. Truly a masterpiece.
deleted by creator
Alts for SBF’s usage of “uncanny valley” he can have for free if he promises not to use “uncanny valley” incorrectly ever again:
It’s 100 BTC if he wants to keep misusing it though.
Especially since everybody knows that the real smart word is “whomst’ve”. Just using “whom” is like being an alpha-male in a turbo-enby world.