= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
EHeller comments on Lone Genius Bias and Returns on Additional Researchers - 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 (63)
Right; I think it's hard to tell whether donations do more good at MIRI, FHI, CEA, or CFAR — but if someone is giving to AMF then I assume they must care only about beings who happen to be living today (a Person-Affecting View), or else they have a very different model of the world than I do, one where the value of the far future is somehow not determined by the intelligence explosion.
Edit: To clarify, this isn't an exhaustive list. E.g. I think GiveWell's work is also exciting, though less in need of smaller donors right now because of Good Ventures.
There is also the possibility that they believe that MIRI/FHI/CEA/CFAR will have no impact on the intelligence explosion or the far future.
He's talking specifically about people donating to AMF. There are more things people can do than donate to AMF and donate to one of MIRI, FHI, CEA, and CFAR.
Correct.
Or simply because the quality of research is positively correlated with ability to secure funding, and thus research that would not be done without your donations generally has the lowest expected value of all research. In case of malaria, we need quantity, in case of AI research, we need quality.