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.

Raelifin comments on Marketing Rationality - Less Wrong Discussion

28 Post author: Viliam 18 November 2015 01:43PM

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

Comments (220)

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

Comment author: Raelifin 23 November 2015 05:27:49PM 1 point [-]

I agree! Having good intentions does not imply the action has net benefit. I tried to communicate in my post that I see this as a situation where failure isn't likely to cause harm. Given that it isn't likely to hurt, and it might help, I think it makes sense to support in general.

(To be clear: Just because something is a net positive (in expectation) clearly doesn't imply one ought to invest resources in supporting it. Marginal utility is a thing, and I personally think there are other projects which have higher total expected-utility.)

Comment author: Lumifer 23 November 2015 05:46:27PM *  0 points [-]

a situation where failure isn't likely to cause harm. Given that it isn't likely to hurt, and it might help, I think it makes sense to support in general.

A failure isn't likely to cause major harm, but by similar reasoning success is not likely to lead to major benefits as well. In simpler terms, InIn isn't likely to have a large impact of any kind. Given this, I still see no reason why minor benefits are more likely than minor harm.