You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

kodos96 comments on Stupid Questions Open Thread - Less Wrong Discussion

42 Post author: Costanza 29 December 2011 11:23PM

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

Comments (265)

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

Comment author: John_Maxwell_IV 26 March 2012 06:31:56PM 1 point [-]

It's just that the same goes for "Include everyone except fundamentalist Christians."

There is no clear bright line determining who is or is not a fundamentalist Christian. Right now, there pretty much is a clear bright line determining who is or is not human. And that clear bright line encompasses everyone we would possibly want to cooperate with.

Your advisory board suggestion ignores the fact that we have to be able to cooperate prior to the invention of CEV deducers.

And you're not describing a process for how the advisory board is decided either. Different advisory boards may produce different groups of enfranchised minds. So your suggestion doesn't resolve the problem.

In fact, I don't see how putting a group of minds on the advisory board is any different than just making them the input to the CEV. If a person's CEV is that someone's mind should contribute to the optimizer's target, that will be their CEV regardless of whether it's measured in an advisory board context or not.

Comment author: kodos96 01 January 2013 12:32:35AM 1 point [-]

There is no clear bright line determining who is or is not a fundamentalist Christian. Right now, there pretty much is a clear bright line determining who is or is not human.

Is there? What about unborn babies? What about IVF fetuses? People in comas? Cryo-presevered bodies? Sufficiently-detailed brain scans?