Funny! I could have sworn I'd seen that in there, too. (But maybe my brain just automatically adds "max+3" everywhere, since that's a trend throughout the rules, and therefore seems logical.)
On the subject of rewarding death, I think that's great. It seems that the new version 1) rewards death (although it's mixed, given that changing playbooks *could* be against your wishes, and the -1 Hard is generally not desirable), but also 2) doesn't give the player as many "lives" to play with, as the fourth time you snuff it, it's for reals. I was curious to hear how this change came about, but I support it 100% - much more interesting this way. It's actually one of my favourite updates.
I always thought the almost-purely-mechanical Debilities were a bit dry, and this makes the choice you make when you "die" much more intense, I think ("and this is the time when I came back broken/the time I came back unhinged/the time when I came back a totally different person and started anew"). Having "you die" on the list is a nice touch of scary, as well - your character's mortality is right there on the sheet, staring you in the face (even though we know that it's not too likely to happen).
As for rewarding weird, that's an interesting question. I know it's been a design feature of AW since the start (increasing your weird, and then, secondly, your hard, seem to be the most available directions for character development). I always figured it was to draw us deeper into the mysteries of the maelstrom, which leads to raising the stakes of the larger-scale weirdness in the game, twisting the characters, and encouraging people to take more +weird moves as well as, eventually, advancing the "open your brain" move. We're more likely to interact with the maelstrom, and, eventually, pierce its mysteries.
Interacting with the maelstrom gives the MC more opportunities to bring in even higher stakes (it's easier to craft a fictional situation where dealing with the maelstrom means that global or large-scale issues are at stake than, say, something like "read a sitch") and for the players to enact some truly meaningful changes to the world at large. So, it's a push towards larger stakes, increasing weirdness, and exploring the mysterious, underlying nature of Apocalypse World. "Opening your brain" is the most open-ended move, and gives the group an avenue to explore some of the weirder and larger challenges they can't engage with their guns, their cars, or their sexuality.
(I think it's a bit more misleading to say that getting a +1 weird could actually be "bad" for you, though. Maybe it could tempt a person to take on greater challenges, but that's hardly a *disadvantage* - just a temptation and an incentive.)
The second most common advance seems to be increasing hard (and related combat abilities), which is, of course, the second most likely method available to PCs if they want to establish something meaningful and change the nature of the world. But it's less flexible and more costly, so it gets second billling. That's my guess, anyway.
I'm not entirely sure where the game punishes you, exactly. I'll have to think on that. Anyone else have some guesses/ideas?
Vincent, have these things changed meaningfully in the second edition, in your opinion? They certainly have when it comes to dying, but otherwise I don't know. Does the move from Fronts to a threap map affect gameplay (and have any long-term ramifications), or is it just a better/smoother procedure, like the change to Hx?