Gleb_Tsipursky comments on Why CFAR's Mission? - Less Wrong

38 Post author: AnnaSalamon 02 January 2016 11:23PM

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

Comments (55)

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

Comment author: AnnaSalamon 11 January 2016 03:19:35AM *  3 points [-]

If we can get politicians to be more sane about short, medium, and long-term existential risk, it seems like that would be a win-win scenario. What are CFAR's thoughts on that?

Getting politicians to me more sane sounds awesome, but somewhat harder for us and more outside our immediate reach than getting STEM-heavy students to be more sane. I realize I said "who are most likely to actually usefully impact the world", but I should perhaps instead have said "who have high values for the product of [likely to usefully impact the world if they think well] * [comparatively easy for us to assist in acquiring good thinking skills]"; and STEM seems to help with both of these.

Still, we are keen to have aspiring politicians, civil servants, etc. to our workshops, we've found financial aid for several such in the past, and we'd love it if you or others would recommend our workshops to aspiring rationalists who are interested in this path (as well as in other paths).

Comment author: Gleb_Tsipursky 11 January 2016 08:12:27PM 0 points [-]

Anna, thanks for clarifying about impacting the world, I think it's much clearer (and epistemically accurate) the way you rephrased it.

I will keep in mind about recommending aspiring politicians and civil servants for your workshops, as well as financial aid opportunities for them.