private_messaging comments on Bayesian Adjustment Does Not Defeat Existential Risk Charity - Less Wrong

43 Post author: steven0461 17 March 2013 08:50AM

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

Comments (89)

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

Comment author: private_messaging 17 April 2013 08:53:25PM 4 points [-]
  • Probability current work is why we manage: 30%

(Arguably too low. Even if MIRI crashes and somebody else carries on successfully, I'd estimate a pretty high probability that their causal pathway there will have had something to do with MIRI. It is difficult to overstate just how much this problem was not on the horizon, at all, of work anyone could actually go out and do twenty years ago.)

For this to work out to 7%, a donor would need 30% probability that their choice of the organization to donate to is such that with this organization we live, and without, we die.

What donor can be so confident in their choice? Is Thiel this confident? Of course not, he only puts in a small fraction of his income, and he puts more into something like this. By the way I am rather curious about your opinion on this project.