EdoArad

Doing stuff @ Effective Altruism Israel
5075 karmaJoined Working (6-15 years)Tel Aviv-Yafo, Israel
0

Bio

Participation
1

Hey! I'm Edo, married + 2 cats, I live in Tel-Aviv, Israel, and I feel weird writing about myself so I go meta.

I'm a mathematician, I love solving problems and helping people. My LinkedIn profile has some more stuff.

I'm a forum moderator, which mostly means that I care about this forum and about you! So let me know if there's anything I can do to help.

I'm currently working full-time at EA Israel, doing independent research and project management. Currently mostly working on evaluating the impact of for-profit tech companies, but I have many projects and this changes rapidly. 

Comments
838

Topic contributions
32

Interesting idea! Seems like locusts are halal (same as in Judaism), but that may not be relevant. 

Also found this - https://seekersguidance.org/answers/hanafi-fiqh/are-chickens-who-mostly-feed-on-impurities-like-ants-worms-and-insects-impermissible/

Great idea! 

If it'd be helpful, I ran a 4 session workshop for people in my local community on "EA research methods": https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VQfVbZSZow_Oq24cnRQpFzykHzIdcG8Jmjx6ctRFxRg/edit#heading=h.e6lzi7r45ez 

EdoArad
Moderator Comment5
0
0

I'm not sure either - there's some bug and I didn't manage to delete them. I've moved them to personal blog post and I'm alerting the technical team 

So sad that this happens to you again :( 

Thanks for taking the safety measures!

Not run in any way by EA Israel. In fact, I don't think we even have a particularly strong connection.

Re your draft, I'd be interested in taking a look :) 

I thought you've written something similar here - https://globalprioritiesproject.org/2015/02/project-overview-problems-of-unknown-difficulty/ (website is currently down 🐛 - archived version)

nitpick while confused on first reading

I think  should be instead , or else I'm not sure how to interpret it.

efinI really loved this piece of work! Great framework and great write-up :)

In particular, I'm excited about the simplicity and specificity of the pain and pleasure categories, and about how you easily encode ethical worldviews in this context.

Some questions and observations:

  1. The use of the different worldviews seems to be in order to answer "how likely is it that A > B" rather than to make some form of an expected value calculation (say, "maximal choice worthiness" - Moral Uncertainty book). Have you considered alternative approaches? In particular, it may be harder to accurately aggregate the preferences across worldviews from multiple interventions and it doesn't take into account how close is the margin by which to rank. 
  2. Regarding the credence in each worldview (last column of this table) - if I understand correctly, the process involved making subjective guesses on how much each worldview "makes sense" from 1-5, and then weighing each worldview's likelihood linearly with that. I understand that this is intended as a first step and a didactical example, but I'm curious about your thoughts on how this could be improved. 
    I think there are some delicate points where this may go wrong if done quickly, just fleshing out some thoughts:
    1. The different worldviews need to be completely separated from each other and together account for most of the relevant worldviews.
    2. The individual subjective guess per worldview should take into account how likely that is as opposed also to similar worldviews.
    3. Ranking of 1-5 in this setting should be linearly proportional to its probability. 
  3. The proposed definitions of the degrees of pleasure use some sort of a preference-based equivalence between the mirrored degrees of pain. Doesn't that assume that the value of pain-pleasure is symmetric? (perhaps the explanation is that the animal's preference doesn't equal its value, but that feels a bit off to me)
  4. As you write, comparing different species can be complicated. If I understand correctly, one approach you suggest would be to start by saying that, say, one unit of hurtful pain hour is not species-dependent. Then, to account for species differences we would "shrink" the pain-pleasure scale for each animal in some way. Is this a correct interpretation? If so, doesn't that stand against the behavioral definitions of the pain categories?

Thanks again! :)

Load more