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.

wedrifid comments on Open thread, August 19-25, 2013 - Less Wrong Discussion

2 Post author: David_Gerard 19 August 2013 06:58AM

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

Comments (325)

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

Comment author: mwengler 21 August 2013 06:50:29PM *  4 points [-]

We wonder about the moral impact of dust specks in the eyes of 3^^^3 people.

What about dust specks in the eyes of 3^^^3 poodles? Or more to the point, what is the moral cost of killing one person vs one poodle? How many poodles lives would we trade for the life of one person?

Or even within humans, is it human years we would account in coming up with moral equivalencies? Do we discount humans that are less smart, on the theory that we almost certainly discount poodles against humans because they are not as smart as us? Do we discount evil humans compared to helpful humans? Discount unproductive humans against productive ones? What about sims, if it is human*years we count rather than human lives, what of a sim which might be expected to run for more than a trillion subjective years in simulation, do they carry billions times more moral weight than a single meat human who has precommitted to eschew cryonics or upload?

And of course I am using poodle as an algebraic symbol to represent any one of many intelligences. Do we discount poodles against humans because they are not as smart, or is there some other measure of how to relate the moral value of a poodle to the moral value of a person? Does a sim (simulated human running in software) count equal to a meat human? Does an earthworm have epsilon<<1 times the worth of a human, or is it identically 0 times the worth of a human?

What about really big smart AI? Would an AI as smart as an entire planet be worth (morally) preserving at the expense of losing one-fifth the human population?

Comment author: wedrifid 22 August 2013 02:26:19AM 3 points [-]

What about dust specks in the eyes of 3^^^3 poodles? Or more to the point, what is the moral cost of killing one person vs one poodle? How many poodles lives would we trade for the life of one person?

I observe that the answer to the last question is not constrained to be positive.

Comment author: Randy_M 23 August 2013 03:49:15PM 4 points [-]

"Letting those people die was worth it, because they took their cursed yapping poodle with them!"

(quote marks to indicate not my actual views)