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.

ChristianKl comments on Public thread for researchers seeking existential risk consultation - Less Wrong Discussion

0 Post author: snarles 14 August 2014 01:01PM

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

Comments (23)

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

Comment author: ChristianKl 16 August 2014 12:15:40PM 0 points [-]

It's not an easy problem to solve, but it is not unsolvable.

I don't think 'solve' is binary. Different solutions come with different tradeoffs. Membership of supreme courts is made up by judges chosen by political majorities. There are advantages to having a powerful fourth estate that's independent of the other three.

As a practical matter getting a parliament to pass legislation that introduces a new class of people that check whether or not the members of that parliament are holding their promises also seems unrealistic.