Cons: The store might not actually gather one less lobster than usual
This... seems like a pretty big deal, actually. The store still needs the same number of lobsters to serve to customers who order lobster to eat it, so... how exactly would they gather one less lobster than usual? What's the actual plan, here?
That's a good point, and applies to all of them. I think it would be that it encourages people to recognize the rights of non-human animals, but it might just drive demand and increase the popularity of lobster stores, meaning it might do more harm than good. Should I delete this post or edit it to mention to not do this for this reason?
Buying a lobster from a store and setting it free could do more harm than good. This is because you might increase demand to the extent that the supply goes up by more than 1, and it wastes your time.
On a small scale:
Do buy a lobster & save it
Don't buy a lobster & not save it
1 Lobster saved per person
1 Lobster not saved per person
∼1 Lobster captured due to increased demand per person
∼1 Lobster not captured due to increased demand per person
Lobster store gets money
Lobster store doesn't get money
You and other participants lose some time from your days
You and other participants don't lose some time from your days
Also, doing it on a large scale adds another component. It might encourage people to recognize the rights of non-human animals, but it might also drive demand and increase the popularity of lobster stores, meaning it might do more harm than good.
On a large scale:
Do buy a lobster & save it
Don't buy a lobster & not save it
1 Lobster saved per person
1 Lobster not saved per person
∼1 Lobster captured due to increased demand per person
∼1 Lobster not captured due to increased demand per person
Lobster store gets money
Lobster store doesn't get money
You and other participants lose some time from your days
You and other participants don't lose some time from your days
It might produce a higher view of non-human animals in the public eye
Won't produce a higher view of non-human animals in the public eye
It might build publicity for lobster stores, increasing demand.
It won't build publicity for lobster stores, increasing demand.
Epistemic status: Speculation from two decently informed advocates armed with anecdata.
Note on process: After having some version of this conversation several times and saying, “we should probably write about this publicly,” we took the less heroic route: we recorded one of our conversations, fed the transcript into an LLM, and then substantially revised the structure, substance, and framing ourselves. We will not be sharing the transcript, as it is in...
I want to start by noting that I am amazed and somewhat in awe of what's been accomplished by the EA animal welfare movement. I am enthusiastically supportive of all campaigns that make living and dying conditions less bad for farmed animals.
I worked on such campaigns for almost 20 years, and I'm proud of that work.
That said, I do think it's a strategic error that the EA animal movement has so thoroughly moved on from advocacy for animal liberation and diet change.&n...
The swarm has made me feel AI risk in my bones for the first time
Until the Hugging Face / OpenAI swarm thing, I think I deep down felt pretty skeptical that extinction or serious loss of control scenarios were plausible in the next few years.
I’ve been lurking on LessWrong for years, and I remember being freaked out by Yudkowsky’s ‘List of Lethalities’ in 2022, and thinking that this did seem intellectually convincing, and maybe I should do something about it. But it didn...
This... seems like a pretty big deal, actually. The store still needs the same number of lobsters to serve to customers who order lobster to eat it, so... how exactly would they gather one less lobster than usual? What's the actual plan, here?
That's a good point, and applies to all of them. I think it would be that it encourages people to recognize the rights of non-human animals, but it might just drive demand and increase the popularity of lobster stores, meaning it might do more harm than good. Should I delete this post or edit it to mention to not do this for this reason?
Maybe edit your post? I don't know, it's really up to you.