= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
DanielLC comments on A Challenge for LessWrong - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (158)
At all is the enemy of highest expected value.
You shouldn't worry so much about finding the best charity that you don't end up donating to one, but that doesn't mean it isn't worth taking the risk that you won't end up donating.
Suppose you have to choices: donate to charity A, or try and find the best charity you can and donate to that. You don't have much willpower, and if you go for the second choice, there's a 50:50 chance you won't end up donating at all. But if you do find a better charity, it could easily be an order of magnitude better. Over all, you're five times better off looking for another charity.
You need to stop looking for a better charity eventually, of course. You can't always keep looking for a better one. Just be careful when you stop.
This is a very good point. I am worried, however, about people (read: me) using "It doesn't maximize utility!" as a motivated stopping point.