= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
thomblake comments on The Singularity Institute's Arrogance Problem - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (307)
A lot of people are suggesting something like "SIAI should publish more papers", but I'm not sure anyone (including those who are making the suggestion) would actually change their behavior based on that. It sounds an awful lot like "SIAI should hire a PhD".
I've been a donor for a long time, but every now and then I've wondered whether I should be - and the fact that they don't publish more has been one of the main reasons why I've felt those doubts.
I do expect the paper thing to actually be the true rejection of a lot of people. I mean, demanding some outputs is one of the most basic expectations you could have.
I consider "donating to SIAI" to be on the same level as "donating to webcomics" - I pay Eliezer for the entertainment value of his writing, in the same spirit as when I bought G.E.B. and thereby paid Douglas Hofstadter for the entertainment value of his writing.
Of course it depends on the specific papers and the nature of the publications. "Publish more papers" seems like shorthand for "Demonstrate that you are capable of rigorously defending your novel/controversial ideas well enough that very many experts outside of the transhumanism movement will take them seriously." It seems to me that doing this would change a lot of people's behavior.
How would someone convince you that it was their true rejection?
Donate to groups that actually demonstrate results.
Like who? I don't know any other non-profit working on FAI.
If you limit your choice of charity to one working on FAI, I am not aware of any others. However, for a group that has demonstrated results in their domain: Schistosomiasis Control Initiative.
I don't see why donating to SCI would convince people with thomblake's skepticism.
It would convince them that at least some people donate to organizations with visible outputs (like SCI). (Disclaimer: the lack of publications actually is not my true rejection of donating to SIAI, which has more to do with the lack of evidence that SIAI's cause is not only important, but urgent.)
Many people already do that through GiveWell, and yet he appears unconvinced.
Agreed. Then again, the OP didn't actually pose the question "What would change your behavior?" (Which I assume translates to "What would cause you to donate more to SI and encourage others to do so?")