AlexanderRM comments on Approaching rationality via a slippery slope - Less Wrong

8 Post author: paulfchristiano 04 April 2011 05:51AM

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

Comments (11)

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

Comment author: Desrtopa 04 April 2011 03:03:47PM 13 points [-]

Damn, does SIAI have any kids they can push down a well?

... I can never run for public office.

Comment author: AlexanderRM 05 October 2015 02:02:41AM 0 points [-]

A more practical and simple (and possibly legal) idea for abusing knowledge of irrational charity: Instead of asking for money to save countless children, ask for money to save one, specific child.

If one circulated a message on the internet saying that donations could save the life of a specific child, obviously if you then used the money for something unrelated there would be laws against that. But if you simply, say, A: lied about why they were in danger of dying, B: overstated the amount of money needed, C: left out the nationality of the child, and D: Used the money to save a large number of children, do you think a court would convict that?

Getting the money towards some cause where the child-saving is a lot less direct, like technological research or SIAI, would probably get hit for lying, but for something like fighting Malaria or the like that might be incredibly useful.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 05 October 2015 11:09:20AM *  1 point [-]

If one circulated a message on the internet saying that donations could save the life of a specific child, obviously if you then used the money for something unrelated there would be laws against that. But if you simply, say, A: lied about why they were in danger of dying, B: overstated the amount of money needed, C: left out the nationality of the child, and D: Used the money to save a large number of children, do you think a court would convict that?

You have just rediscovered the idea, "I know, why not just lie!" On which, see this.

I predict that (a) you would be found out, (b) if it came to court, the court would convict (fraud in a good cause is still fraud), and (c) so would the forum of public opinion.

ETA: See also.