Any decent writers or thinkers who work almost exclusively on

>yudkowsky and scaruffi
>decent

wew lad

>>7564390
Half decent I suppose. As in they're one of the few people on the internet who don't regurgitate others ideas.

You know of anyone better? I'd love to hear of better examples.

>>7564384

I've thought about it. A lot, actually. I just don't see it as viable, yet, and I don't have the savings and job security to take the leap.

>>7564451
I'm not saying it's a viable career thing, I don't believe Yudkowsky makes much money off of his site and I know Scaruffi doesn't. Still though, there are like 2 billion internet users, one of them has to have written something important.

Lmao pathetic
Stay in your 4chan bubble you meme person

>>7564512
Again, I'd appreciate it if you stopped memeing and gave me some recommendations of someone in the same field who does it better.

I'm curious to know if those are the only two relevant thinkers on the web.

>>7564534
Yeah these two memes are the only relevant thinkers predominantly working on the internet.
Now delere this thread & fuck off back to rbooks

>>7564550
But r/books is fucking horrible. I posted the question to r/insightfulquestions hoping to find the only two people who post insightful answers and none of them bit.

I'm asking this question not to imply those thinkers are good, but because I'm interested in the viability of the internet as a medium.

>>7564384
Its simple, if your good enough to not use the internet, you don't. If your not good enough to be in print, you use the internet. When it comes to philosophy and literature, the internet isn't an alternate medium, its a lesser medium.

>>7564384
Ribbonfarm

>>7564618
Nick Land pls go

>>7564615

I disagree that in the long run it'll be a lesser medium, while agreeing that it is for now.