Wiki Contributions

Load More

Comments

topic: economics

idea: when building something with local negative externalities, have some mechanism to measure the externalities in terms of how much the surrounding property valuation changed (or are expected to change based, say, through a prediction market) and have the owner of that new structure pay the owners of the surrounding properties.

I wonder what fraction of people identify as "normies"

I wonder if most people have something niche they identify with and label people outside of that niche as "normies"

if so, then a term with a more objective perspective (and maybe better) would be non-<whatever your thing is>

like, athletic people could use "non-athletic" instead of "normies" for that class of people

just a loose thought, probably obvious

some tree species self-slected themselves for height (ie. there's no point in being a tall tree unless taller trees are blocking your sunlight)

humans were not the first species to self-select (although humans can now do it intentionally)

on human self-selection: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309096532_Survival_of_the_Friendliest_Homo_sapiens_Evolved_via_Selection_for_Prosociality

Answer by Mati_RoyApr 14, 202420

Board game: Medium

2 players reveal a card with a word, then they need to say a word based on that and get points if it's the same word (basically, with some more complexities).

Example at 1m20 here: https://youtu.be/yTCUIFCXRtw?si=fLvbeGiKwnaXecaX

I'm glad past Mati cast a wider net has the specifics for this year's Schelling day are different ☺️☺️

idk if the events are often going over time, but I might pass by now if it's still happening ☺️

I liked reading your article; very interesting! 🙏

One point I figured I should x-post with our DMs 😊 --> IMO, if one cares about future lives (as much as present ones) then the question stops really being about expected lives and starts just being about whether an action increases or decreases x-risks. I think a lot/all of the tech you described also have a probability of causing an x-risk if they're not implemented. I don't think we can really determine whether a probability of some of those x-risk is low enough in absolute terms as those probabilities would need to be unreasonably low, leading to full paralysis, and full paralysis could lead to x-risk. I think instead someone with those values (ie. caring about unborn people) should compare the probability of x-risks if a tech gets developed vs not developed (or whatever else is being evaluated). 🙂

I love this story so much, wow! It feels so incredibly tailored to me (because it is 😄). I value that a lot! It's a very scarce resource to begin with, but it hardly gets more tailored than that 😄

that's awesome; thanks for letting me know :)

Load More