Topic Contributions


On Deference and Yudkowsky's AI Risk Estimates

As someone not active in the field of AI risk, and having always used epistemic deference quite heavily, this feels very helpful. I hope it doesn't end up reducing society's efforts to stop AI from taking over the world some day.

What are some of the best books/reads on starting value-aligned for-profit ventures?

I wrote down some thoughts on the trade-offs one encounters when balancing profitability and other values:

Very much interested in other material!

Do you know any research comparing the effectiveness of indirect and direct democracy?

Thanks for your thoughts! 

it seems that in general more indirect democracy functions better due to the fact that voters have little incentive to cast informed votes, whereas representatives are incentivized to make informed decisions on voters behalf.

To let voters cast more informed votes, there's a whole movement around deliberation. You can argue that increases costs for voters, but I think the trade-off is unclear and likely context dependent.

The books are great pointers, will have a look at the research referenced!

Impact Certificates on a Blockchain

There is a lot of information in your post to digest, but I'll focus on what seems to me your biggest point: "public goods are treated like consumables and not investments"

The way I see it, people can consume private and public goods, just like they can invest in providers of private or public goods.  If you want to invest in providers whose main purpose is to provide public goods, there are already a number of possibilities:

  • Buying government bonds
  • Buying shares of Decentralized Autonomous Organizations / cryptocurrencies

Perhaps you can blur the legal lines and find ways in which non-profits can reward shareholders, but I feel that is no different from:

  • Buying shares of impactful/responsible companies which plausibly make some public goods, namely (quadratic funding) crowdfunding platforms, as their main aim is to let groups/communities coordinate to fund (public) goods.

As for whether the main mechanism you introduce holds up in practice:

> If thoughtful altruists are involved in the market and either own a lot of certificates or want to buy a lot of certificates, other traders will want to predict what these “impact whales” think is impactful.

I recommend chatting with !

Are there any 'maximum egoism' pledges?

Thank you for the swift reply!

I was actually looking for pledges which do not list donating to EA charities as part of the pledge requirements.  Apologies for not stating this context clearly enough!

Creating A Kickstarter for Coordinated Action

Glad to see the same excitement I (and likely many others) feel about crowdsourcing platforms! 

Here are more crowdfunding and coordinating platforms to learn from, look at and discuss with:

The Case for Promoting / Creating Public Goods Markets as a Cause Area

Thank you for the write-up, I just published a related article on the topic today which lists other mechanisms besides quadratic funding which can potentially help grow public goods markets.

Having said that, quadratic funding still gained the most traction and promise so far. In the article above I mention various adjustments which can incentivize longer-term public goods production. There also exists an adjustment to account for public bads: "negative contributions",  though those created some negative sentiments in a recent experiment.

Long-Term Influence and Movement Growth: Two Historical Case Studies

Very cool! Finally had time to read the reports. Would there be any utility in cross-posting this information in OPP's Notable Lessons (or all on Forethought) ? It should appeal to the same audience as Philanthropy's Success stories.

Load More