casebash

Comments

When you shouldn't use EA jargon and how to avoid it

Hmm... often I think it is nice to have a standard term for a phenomenon so that people don't have to figure out how to express a certain concept each time and then hope that everyone else follows. Language also has the advantage that insofar as we convince people to adopt our language, we draw them into our worldview.

List of EA-related organisations

This should really be a Wiki page instead since these lists (I even made one myself in the past) always become outdated.

Avoiding Munich's Mistakes: Advice for CEA and Local Groups

This is a really challenging situation - I could honestly see myself leaning either way on this kind of scenario. I used to lean a lot more towards saying whatever I thought was true and ignoring the consequences, but lately I've been thinking that it's important to pick your battles.

I think the key sentence is this one - "On many subjects EAs rightfully attempt to adopt a nuanced opinion, carefully and neutrally comparing the pros and cons, and only in the conclusion adopting a tentative, highly hedged, extremely provisional stance. Alas, this is not such a subject."

What seems more important to me is not necessarily these kinds of edge cases, but that we talk openly about the threat potentially posed. Replacing the talk with a discussion about cancel culture instead seems like it could have been a brilliant Jiu Jitsu move. I'm actually much more worried about what's been going on with ACE than anything else.

The emerging school of patient longtermism

Thanks, that was useful. I didn't realise that his argument involved 1+2 and not just 1 by itself. That said, if the hinge of history was some point in the past, then that doesn't affect our decisions as we can't invest in the past. And perhaps it's a less extraordinary coincidence that the forward-looking hinge of history (where we restrict the time period from now until the end of humanity) could be now, especially if in the average case we don't expect history to go on much longer.

The emerging school of patient longtermism

I've never found Will's objections to the hinge of history argument persuasive. Convincing me that there was a greater potential impact in past times than I thought, ie. that it would have been very influential to prevent the rise of Christianity, shouldn't make me disbelieve that arguments that AI or bio risks are likely to lead to catastrophe in the next few decades if we don't do anything about it. But maybe I just need to reread the argument again.

Is some kind of minimally-invasive mass surveillance required for catastrophic risk prevention?

DNA engineering has some positive points, but imagine the power that having significant control its citizens personalities would give the government. That shouldn't be underestimated.

Long-term investment fund at Founders Pledge

The real hinge here is how much we should expect the future to be a continuation of the past and how much we update based on our best predictions. Given what we know about about existential risk and the likelihood that AI will dramatically change our economy, I don't think this idea makes sense in the current context.

Is some kind of minimally-invasive mass surveillance required for catastrophic risk prevention?

I agree that such a system would be terrifying. But I worry that its absence would be even more terrifying. Limited surveillance systems work decently for gun control, but when we get to the stage where someone can kill tens of thousands or even millions instead of a hundred I suspect it'll break down.

New EA International Innovation Fellowship

It's great to hear that you are setting this up. However, the current post seems light on details. Why are these areas of particular interest? What kind of commitment are you hoping for from participants?

Load More