JonahSinick comments on A Proposed Adjustment to the Astronomical Waste Argument - LessWrong

19 Post author: Nick_Beckstead 27 May 2013 03:39AM

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

Comments (38)

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

Comment author: JonahSinick 27 May 2013 08:10:09PM 2 points [-]

Something along the lines of CFAR could fit the bill. I suspect CFAR could have a bigger impact if it targeted people with stronger focus on global welfare, and/or people with greater influence, than the typical CFAR participant. But I recognize that CFAR is still in a nascent stage, so that it's necessary to cooptimize for the development of content, and growth.

I believe that there are other interventions that would also fit the bill, which I'll describe in later posts.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 27 May 2013 08:49:50PM 7 points [-]

CFAR is indeed so cooptimizing and trying to maximize net impact over time; if you think that a different mix would produce a greater net impact, make the case! CFAR isn't a side-effect project where you just have to cross your fingers and hope that sort of thing happens by coincidence while the leaders are thinking about something else, it's explicitly aimed that way.