Yes it would imply that a bit of extra energy can vastly increase consciousness.  But so what?  Why be 99.9999% confident that it can't? 

I think it's a bad result of a view if it implies that no actions we perform are good or bad.  Intuitively it doesn't seem like all chaotic actions are neutral. 

Thanks!

Thank you!

It’s a somewhat long post.  Want to come on the podcast to discuss?

I don't agree with that.  Cluelessness seems to only arise if you have reason to think that on average your actions won't make things better.  And yet even a very flawed procedure will, on average across worlds, do better than chance.  This seems to deal with epistemic cluelessness fine. 

Why can't you take seriously every plausible argument with huge implications? 

What sorts of things do they do?

Thanks, yes I think I fired this post off too quickly without taking time to read deeper analysis of it.  I'll try to give your post a read when I get the chance. 

Interesting point, though I disagree--I think there are strong arguments for thinking that you should just maximize utility https://joecarlsmith.com/2022/03/16/on-expected-utility-part-1-skyscrapers-and-madmen/