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.

Dorikka comments on [Prize] Essay Contest: Cryonics and Effective Altruism - Less Wrong Discussion

2 Post author: lsparrish 08 November 2013 07:55PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (40)
Tags: effective_altruism prize efficient_charity bitcoin cryonics

Comments (40)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Dorikka 08 November 2013 09:45:23PM *  1 point [-]

Meta

Comment author: lsparrish 08 November 2013 10:37:41PM *  5 points [-]

Some meta notes:

  • This is an essay contest because my previous attempt (in 2011) was for a video contest, and nobody entered. (The bitcoins were later stolen from the online wallet that was hosting them and half returned. The remaining 5.5 coins are in a more secure wallet valued at around $2000, which I plan to use for cryonics charity later, no sooner than next April.)
  • I consider essays to be Lesswrong's strong point. Further, utilitarians (of various kinds) and cryonicists (of various kinds) are common here as are ideas for how the two can/should overlap. I want to see those ideas.
  • If anyone wins and does not want a bitcoin, I would be happy to paypal them the equivalent value, although I consider that a bit less convenient.
  • There have been essay contests here in the past, at least one of which has resulted in good outcomes. I don't know if the culture has changed too much since then or if the value of a whole bitcoin is so high it will drive people crazy, but I am assuming not.
Comment author: Dorikka 08 November 2013 10:01:26PM 0 points [-]

I don't think that this contest will accomplish what you (lsparrish) want it to accomplish, and assign a significant probability to it being of net negative value. This seems likely for the following reasons:

  • I think that the reward is a monetary incentive for people to denigrate others contributions in favor of their own (as a tactic).
  • I think that the reward will cause people to become emotionally invested in their own proposed solutions.
  • More broadly, I think that the reward may put contestants in a 'winning' mindset and submit/argue with this in mind, and as a result fail to optimize for effective information transfer.

I also think that the implementation details of the contest could be improved iff you still plan to hold it (which I currently disapprove of):

  • I think that you have failed to sufficiently specify the value set for which contestants are to optimize. Total utilitarianism? Average utilitarianism? It is reasonable to leave this open, but contestants may fail to specify this in their essays.
  • I would not know what to do with a Bitcoin if I were awarded one, and I believe that you underestimate the fraction of the LW readership for which this is true.

Tapping out.

Comment author: somervta 08 November 2013 10:16:25PM *  5 points [-]

I would not know what to do with a Bitcoin if I were awarded one

Really? I suspect you know exactly what you would do - google. As lsparrish said, a bitcoin is worth a considerable amount in USD, and it's really not that difficult to find out how to exchange one for USD, not if you're relatively internet/Google-savvy.

(My apologies for responding to a post that was tapping out, but I suspect there is a considerable number of people like yourself who are overestimating exactly how difficult it is to use bitcoins)

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit