# All Posts

Sorted by Magic (New & Upvoted)

# Week Of Sunday, January 19th 2020Week Of Sun, Jan 19th 2020

Shortform [Beta]
11Khorton6d Who should pay the cost of Googling studies on the EA Forum? 1. Many EA Forum posts have minimal engagement with relevant academic literature 2. If you see a Forum post that doesn't engage with literature you think is relevant, you could make a claim without looking up a citation based on your memory, but there's a reasonable chance you'll be wrong. 3. Many people say they'd rather see an imperfect post or comment than not have it at all. 4. But people tend to remember an original claim, even if it's later debunked. 5. Maybe the best option is to phrase my comment as a question: "Have you looked at the literature on X?"
5Ramiro5d Shouldn't we have more EA editors in Philpapers categories? Philpapers [https://philpapers.org/]is this huge index/community of academic philosophers and texts. It's a good place to start researching a topic. Part of the work is done by voluntary editors and assistants, who assume the responsibility of categorizing and including relevant bibliography; in exchange, they are constantly in touch with the corresponding subject. Some EAs are responsible for their corresponding fields; however, I noticed that some relevant EA-related categories currently have no editor (e.g.: Impact of Artificial Intelligence). I wonder: wouldn't it be useful if EAs assumed thses positions?

# Week Of Sunday, January 12th 2020Week Of Sun, Jan 12th 2020

Personal Blogposts
Shortform [Beta]
9Linch10d I find the unilateralist’s curse [https://www.nickbostrom.com/papers/unilateralist.pdf] a particularly valuable concept to think about. However, I now worry that “unilateralist” is an easy label to tack on, and whether a particular action is unilateralist or not is susceptible to small changes in framing. Consider the following hypothetical situations: 1. Company policy vs. team discretion 2. Alice is a researcher in a team of scientists at a large biomedical company. While working on the development of an HIV vaccine, the team accidentally created an air-transmissible variant of HIV. The scientists must decide whether to publish their discovery with the rest of the company, knowing that leaks may exist, and the knowledge may be used to create a devastating biological weapon, but also that it could help those who hope to develop defenses against such weapons, including other teams within the same company. Most of the team thinks they should keep it quiet, but company policy is strict that such information must be shared with the rest of the company to maintain the culture of open collaboration. Alice thinks the rest of the team should either share this information or quit. Eventually, she tells her skip manager her concerns, who relayed it to the rest of the company in a company-open document. Alice does not know if this information ever leaked past the company. 3. Stan and the bomb 4. Stan is an officer in charge of overseeing a new early warning system intended to detect (nuclear) intercontinental ballistic missiles from an enemy country. A warning system appeared to have detected five missiles heading towards his homeland, quickly going through 30 early layers of verification. Stan suspects this is a false alarm, but is not sure. Military instructions are clear that such warnings must immediately be relayed upwards.Stan decided not to relay the message to his superiors, on the g
9Khorton12d I'm 60% sure that LessWrong people use the term "Moloch" in almost exactly the same way as social justice people use the term "kyriarchy" (or "capitalist cis-hetero patriarchy"). I might program my browser to replace "Moloch" with "kyriarchy". Might make Christian Twitter confusing though.
7EdoArad14d Basic Research vs Applied Research 1. If we are at the Hinge of History, it is less reasonable to focus on long-term knowledge building via basic research, and vice versa. 2. If we have identified the most promising causes well, then targeted applied research is promising.
4Ramiro10d Philosophers and economists seem to disagree about the marginalist/arbitrage argument [https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/economics-econometrics-and-finance/social-discount-rate] that a social discount rate should equal (or at least be majorly influenced by) the marginal social opportunity cost of capital. I wonder if there's any discussion of this topic in the context of negative interest rates. For example, would defenders of that argument accept that, as those opportunity costs decline, so should the SDR?