JGWeissman comments on Efficient Charity - Less Wrong

31 Post author: multifoliaterose 04 December 2010 10:27AM

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

Comments (182)

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

Comment author: JGWeissman 05 December 2010 06:18:30AM 1 point [-]

I don't see the nontransitivity, but it does seem to imply:

U(x-risk reduction($x)) - U(Disneyland($x)) < U(Disneyland($x)) - U(personal luxuries($x))

which, while not inconsistent, seems to undervalue x-risk reduction relative to trips to Disneyland for cancer patients.

Comment author: komponisto 05 December 2010 06:33:05AM 1 point [-]

You're right. The penultimate item is too low; it should in fact be second.

All I really wanted to point out was the abundance of items between the first and the last, and the fact that (people donating to save lives instead of buying personal luxuries) is higher than (people donating to save lives instead of donating to provide trips to Disneyland).