jimrandomh comments on Transparency and Accountability - Less Wrong

16 Post author: multifoliaterose 21 August 2010 01:01PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (141)

Comments (141)

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

Comment author: multifoliaterose 21 August 2010 06:32:33PM *  13 points [-]

Okay, thinking it over for the last hour, I now have a concrete statement to make about my willingness to donate to SIAI. I promise to donate $2000 to SIAI in a year's time if by that time SIAI has secured a 2-star rating from GiveWell for donors who are interested in existential risk.

I will urge GiveWell to evaluate existential risk charities with a view toward making this condition a fair one. If after year's time GiveWell has not yet evaluated SIAI, my offer will still stand.

[Edit: Slightly rephrased, removed condition involving quotes which had been taken out of context.]

Comment author: jimrandomh 21 August 2010 06:43:32PM 10 points [-]

(b) You publically apologize for and qualify your statements quoted by XiXiDu here. I believe that these statements are very bad for public relations. Even if true, they are only true at the margin and so at very least need to be qualified in that way.

(Note: I have not had the chance to verify that XiXiDu is quoting you correctly because I have not had access to online video for the past few weeks - condition (b) is given on the assumption that the quotes are accurate)

It is always wrong to demand the retraction of a quote which you have not seen in context.

Comment author: multifoliaterose 21 August 2010 09:30:04PM 5 points [-]

Thanks, I have edited my comment accordingly.

Comment author: multifoliaterose 21 August 2010 07:23:47PM 1 point [-]

As I said, condition (b) is given based on an assumption which may be wrong. In any case, for public relations purposes, I want SIAI to very clearly indicate that it does not request arbitrarily large amounts of funding from donors.

Comment author: JGWeissman 21 August 2010 07:51:19PM 6 points [-]

I want SIAI to very clearly indicate that it does not request arbitrarily large amounts of funding from donors.

In one of the videos XiXiDu cites as reference, Eliezer predicts that funding at the level of a billion dollars would be counterproductive, because it would attract the wrong kind of attention.

Comment author: multifoliaterose 21 August 2010 09:30:29PM *  2 points [-]

Thanks for pointing this out. I edited my comment accordingly.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit