= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
CuSithBell comments on People who want to save the world - 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 (237)
Well, I think most of us want to save the world, or at least help to save it. The BIG problem is to find an efficient strategy to do so. We should make concrete proposals, not merely profess our altruism. ....and to be not too hypocritical here are my naive proposals: 1. If your IQ is enormous -> FAI-research 2. If you have money-making skills-> donate millions to SIAI, FHI, or other charities 3. If your IQ is really high-> do some research ( maybe SENS, computer science, nanotech, etc...) 4. or if you not that clever or you suffer akrasia: get an useful, but not too challenging job, like becoming a biology teacher and fight creationism, or become a good journalist or lawyer, etc... 5. get involved in online discussions and make the world a little more rational, and criticize vague posts or comments full of applause lights like this one!
Good post, but this gave me pause. Does LW / do you really think that IQ is the relevant factor here?
To be clear, with IQ I mean intelligence, or abstract, analytical reasoning. But what else should you need? Maybe self-confidence?
Motivation, energy and persistence. The best smarts in the world don't help much if actually studying all the requisite subjects feels like too much work.
Many people with high IQs are at a disadvantage, since they get used to all schoolwork being easy and not requiring any effort. When things start to actually get hard, they give up. This is one of the main reasons why I concluded that it isn't worth it for me to try to get into machine learning or other high-mathy fields, after beating my head against a rock wall for a couple of years.
Right. I am a poster child for akrasia and lazyness. But, wow, I never thought this was a problem for you. Your output is impressing. ( At least to me, I've published on my blog one sentence in 1 year....) Enough flatter. What kind of research do you focus on, instead? You've mentioned cognitive science somewhere, at least I think so. In which fields do you think people with akrasia-problems and IQ of around 130 can have the most impact for reducing existential risks? Hopefully not "Make money and donate", I have some emotional, maybe irrational concerns with capitalism. Sorry, if this comment is to personal, the lesswrong-culture seems to punish this kind of comment, but I would value your advice!
I don't mind. :) I think there should be more of this kind of discussion.
I don't think there is a general answer to this. There are many forms of akrasia. They have several different causes and also several different effects. Where you can have the most impact depends on what your akrasia allows you to do, and which parts of your akrasia you can beat. It also depends on what your natural talents are otherwise, what you're intrinsically motivated to do, and what you can motivate yourself to do even though you have no intrinsic interest in it.
For instance, you were surprised to hear about my issues because you've seen me write a lot. The thing is, I find writing-related akrasia relatively easy to beat. However, when it comes to learning new math, my akrasia gets a lot worse. Overcoming it usually requires that I see interesting applications for which I can use the math at once. I'm also not intrinsically curious about most math: the best math folks are the ones who get a lot of practice at it because they keep playing with fun math problems all the time. I certainly play with math problems every now and then as well, but nowhere to the degree that some people do. I still haven't read most of the decision theory discussion here.
My advice would be to figure out where your comparative advantage is. Look at the things you're good at and which come easily to you. Then try to figure out whether there's something x-risk-related that could benefit from those skills.
Personally, I finally figured out that my comparative advantage is probably in writing and the social sciences. I just finished a BA in cognitive science, and I'm now taking a three-month sabbatical to concentrate on a) getting practice in writing b) improving my mental health by various means, particularly meditation. My current long-term goal involves honing my writing to such a point that I can make a living with it and become an influential enough writer/public figure to significantly raise support for x-risk work.
I currently think this is the best way to go for me: but for somebody else, the best way to go might be something different entirely.
Thanks for the advice! I really appreciate it.
That I would agree with (maybe some sort of "intellectual creativity" if that's not included, though I guess it should be). Generally, though, I see IQ used to refer to the thing measured by IQ tests instead of to intelligence.
Ah, sorry. For me IQ is just an abbreviation for intelligence. ( In its broadest meaning, I can't define it. But you know, Einstein, Russell,Bostrom, Yudkowsky ect... have something in common, which I would say is Intelligence. ) But you're right, in reality IQ means something different, guess I should change my use of the word.....
Well, cheers then! Confusion: solved.
Is everyone at SIAI in the triple nines cut off? (IQ in the 99.9 percentile)
For these eleven ... maybe. Much more likely than 10^-33 for eleven average or random people. My guess is yes, but they may just be good at presenting their credentials.
Sure, it's a higher chance, but I'd still say it's pretty improbable - my understanding is that IQ isn't that great.