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.

Regex comments on Informing Others: Maximally Efficient? - Less Wrong Discussion

5 Post author: Regex 10 October 2014 11:24AM

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

Comments (22)

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

Comment author: Regex 11 October 2014 02:12:15AM 0 points [-]

If I were to do it professionally then you are correct on all fronts, but I was thinking of a far more informal approach.

Literally just talking to people, getting them to read the materials, and discussing the nuances of rational thought. The point here was supposed to be less about the money, and more about the value of producing more rational individuals. I don't necessarily have to convince people to donate to one charity over another, but by exposing them to the ideas of the site they would seek out such optimizations on their own.

I'll grant you that it is probably a minority of the population who would change, but the sum of the changes from people whose lives change dramatically could offset that 20k a year. For example, if I were to find one other person who then decides to donate 20k a year, I would have done as much good as if I were working. Even if I stopped talking to people entirely.

There is of course nothing stopping me from also doing this while working, but if it is actually more effective then if I were able to survive without working it would become the ideal. Realistically it ends up making a bit more sense to work for at least a decade while simultaneously doing this, build up enough cash to survive for a good long while, and then quit working and convert people with the rest of my life.