= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
paper-machine comments on The Singularity Institute's Arrogance Problem - 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 (307)
How would someone convince you that it was their true rejection?
Donate to groups that actually demonstrate results.
Like who? I don't know any other non-profit working on FAI.
If you limit your choice of charity to one working on FAI, I am not aware of any others. However, for a group that has demonstrated results in their domain: Schistosomiasis Control Initiative.
I don't see why donating to SCI would convince people with thomblake's skepticism.
It would convince them that at least some people donate to organizations with visible outputs (like SCI). (Disclaimer: the lack of publications actually is not my true rejection of donating to SIAI, which has more to do with the lack of evidence that SIAI's cause is not only important, but urgent.)
Many people already do that through GiveWell, and yet he appears unconvinced.