smk
Bio
All opinions are my own and not representative of any organisation.
I'm interested in justice, philosophy & the future, and global health & development. Studying engineering.
Posts 1
Comments8
A case for ”quantifiable altruism” as a better name than “effective altruism” in retrospect: https://twitter.com/esyudkowsky/status/1616187567841632259?s=46&t=e0dDZKUej1AFmYDbprPcSQ by Yudkowsky.
TBH I see nothing wrong with this, as in it makes sense to me. Happy to hear more thoughts.
This seems quite hand-wavy and I’m skeptical of it. Could you give an example where “we” have ignored the experts? And when you say experts, you probably refer to expert reasoning or scientific consensus and not appeals to authority.
Your statement gained a lot of upvotes but “EA ignores expoerts” just fits the prevailing narrative too well but I haven’t seen any examples of it. Happy to update if I find one.
This will be unpopular here, but these calls for public flagellation of "EA leaders" amounts to nothing more than scapegoating and trying to direct general disappointment to someone, even though it's not the right people.
Yes it's obviously interesting to speculate about who knew what, but no amount of "institutional reform" can change these things.
Also, this post has quite a conspirational tone which strikes me as unhelpful and not particularly truth seeking.