" You can't make any progress on the problems you care about without strong, practical organisations full of people working together in predictable ways. And those organisations will need to be part of a wider coalition. You need to be trustworthy. "
Great points. This event should help movements including effective altruism, longermism, and those focused on a flourishing future grow and mature. FTX has served as a lightning strike, jolting a community of bright-eyed optimists into a real world of tradeoffs and consequences.
Long term, this might spearhead a valuable transition into integrating with the 'real world' a bit more more. Further integrating with businesses, across disciplines, and government will require breadth of perspective. Self-referential and insular communities, such as the organization that runs this blog, will benefit from reflection and further integration with the >99% of the world with minimal understanding of EA principles.
' We all need to live in a society --- there's very little utility to be found in the state of nature. In order to live in a society we have to agree to cooperate with each other, and agree to withdraw our cooperation from, or even actively punish, defectors. Naive act utilitarianism simply isn't compatible with this. Individuals can't be expected to agree on individual act-based decisions, and you can't form a coalition with people who are making it up as they go along.
A basic respect for property rights is a good ethical rule, that we will all be much worse off without. Support for earning to give in no way entails support for stealing to give.
There are lots of situations, either constructed or actually occurring, where it's unclear how to reason about the priority of different rules or policies. The actions of SBF are not any sort of boundary case. You can't run a society where it's okay for your trading partner to abruptly decide it would be better for the world if your goods were sent elsewhere. '
In this specific case, the majority of recoverable funds should naturally be restored to customers. The world is a bit more grey. Governments tax and allocate a significant portion of GDP and worldwide resources. Property rights, corporate power, and overall influence vary significantly across many of the world's biggest economies.
When it comes to the double edged sword of technological development, and the associated existential risks that could wipe out significant swaths of observable sentient life, our modern conception of just property rights may need to evolve alongside the commensurate risks. As technology has rapidly expanded and accelerated, so have threat vectors and risks.
Hopefully this crisis will prove a valuable opportunity to strengthen and grow as we trod forward.
" You can't make any progress on the problems you care about without strong, practical organisations full of people working together in predictable ways. And those organisations will need to be part of a wider coalition. You need to be trustworthy. "
Great points. This event should help movements including effective altruism, longermism, and those focused on a flourishing future grow and mature. FTX has served as a lightning strike, jolting a community of bright-eyed optimists into a real world of tradeoffs and consequences.
Long term, this might spearhead a valuable transition into integrating with the 'real world' a bit more more. Further integrating with businesses, across disciplines, and government will require breadth of perspective. Self-referential and insular communities, such as the organization that runs this blog, will benefit from reflection and further integration with the >99% of the world with minimal understanding of EA principles.
' We all need to live in a society --- there's very little utility to be found in the state of nature. In order to live in a society we have to agree to cooperate with each other, and agree to withdraw our cooperation from, or even actively punish, defectors. Naive act utilitarianism simply isn't compatible with this. Individuals can't be expected to agree on individual act-based decisions, and you can't form a coalition with people who are making it up as they go along.
A basic respect for property rights is a good ethical rule, that we will all be much worse off without. Support for earning to give in no way entails support for stealing to give.
There are lots of situations, either constructed or actually occurring, where it's unclear how to reason about the priority of different rules or policies. The actions of SBF are not any sort of boundary case. You can't run a society where it's okay for your trading partner to abruptly decide it would be better for the world if your goods were sent elsewhere. '
In this specific case, the majority of recoverable funds should naturally be restored to customers. The world is a bit more grey. Governments tax and allocate a significant portion of GDP and worldwide resources. Property rights, corporate power, and overall influence vary significantly across many of the world's biggest economies.
When it comes to the double edged sword of technological development, and the associated existential risks that could wipe out significant swaths of observable sentient life, our modern conception of just property rights may need to evolve alongside the commensurate risks. As technology has rapidly expanded and accelerated, so have threat vectors and risks.
Hopefully this crisis will prove a valuable opportunity to strengthen and grow as we trod forward.