Apparently even his friends are using his full name, Dr. Scott Alexander Siskind now, and he has a new psychiatry practice in San Francisco, Lorien, and a new blog Astral Codex Ten. Writing in defense of him, Scott Aaronson makes the following comment about the New York Times article.
The trouble with the NYT piece is not that it makes any false statements, but just that it constantly insinuates nefarious beliefs and motives, via strategic word choices and omission of relevant facts that change the emotional coloration of the facts that it does present. I repeatedly muttered to myself, as I read: “dude, you could make anything sound shady with this exact same rhetorical toolkit!”
Exactly. The insistence that they are still mostly-respectable reporters even outside of the science, travel, and style sections rests on wordings, innocent looks, and diminished oaths ("By Saint Loi!") that fool no one beyond a high school AP English class unless they want to be fooled or are in on the joke. We learn the tricks of our trade. I was complimented once on having written a chart note that told any experienced clinician exactly what they needed to know about the patient, even though it could not be said outright. I was deeply complimented at first, but later wondered if this might be a moral deterioration on my part. I confess I don't know where that line is and I may be excusing my own bad behavior. Yet I at least know I am not in the same category as modern journalists and their butter-wouldn't-melt disingenuousness.