randallsquared comments on A Challenge for LessWrong - Less Wrong

16 Post author: simplicio 29 June 2010 11:47PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (158)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: wedrifid 01 July 2010 04:33:23AM 1 point [-]

It should be noted that I observe the tone of the parent of my rebuttal to be aggressive, with vigorous use of shaming to present a position that undermines a core value of this community. A vigorous response should be expected.

At WrongBot's suggestion I have removed the sentence containing the word 'evil'. Since almost nobody except myself uses that word in a technical sense it was foolish of me to include it here. I went through planning to edit out anything else that I wrote in haste that I would remove on reflection but I was surprised to find that was the only edit I needed to make. What remains has my reflective endorsement.

Comment author: randallsquared 01 July 2010 01:12:44PM 0 points [-]

Since almost nobody except myself uses [evil] in a technical sense it was foolish of me to include it here.

What's a technical definition of "evil", then? I would say something about incompatible higher goals, but I'd find your take interesting.

Comment author: wedrifid 01 July 2010 01:33:23PM 0 points [-]

That's a decent take. But how do we account for people that are not most effectively modeled as agents with goals? Deontologists for example, can be evil even if their (alleged) preferences entirely match mine.