= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
evand comments on Open Thread, October 1-15, 2012 - 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 (477)
It bothers me that no one is applying a reversal test here. The paper even calls out intelligence augmentation as the prime example!
I'm inclined to trust Bostrom's well thought out paper on the matter, but I'd be curious to hear opposing views.
I might endorse a certain very specific reversal test.
If I could choose between the current world except that freethinkers are at a significant disadvantage relative to everyone else, versus a world with a four hour workday but we all had to sleep four hours more per night so we still had the same amount of free time, plus our economy was at the same level as in the 1990s...
...then actually I would choose the current world, because the four hours more sleep per night would also apply on the weekends and so totally disrupt the balance, which I hadn't thought of at all in the original post. So never mind.
This assumption that all the change in the amount of waking hours would go towards increasing (or decreasing) labour time is suspect. I mean, why couldn't people keep the current ratio, work 50-hour workweeks and get 14 additional hours of leisure time per week? The rich get better yachts and everybody has more fun.
Vaniver has, now. EDIT: and shminux had already done so.