All of Joel Becker's Comments + Replies

Found this helpful, thanks!

To "there were various suspicious/bad things Drew did," I would reply:

I have this opposing consideration. [...] I gather that part of the reason Alice and Chloe feel this way is that Drew did try to be helpful with respect to their concerns, at least to whatever degree was required for them to ask for him to be shielded from professional consequences.

and, to "the choice he's made to kinda hang around Emerson and Kat for this long," I would reply:

To the extent you believe that Nonlinear has been a disfunctional environment, in significant part due to domine

... (read more)
0Adam Zerner
Successfully pushing back against is certainly difficult. Instead, I would expect, in general, Good Person to not have a very strong relationship with their brother, Bad Person, in the first place, and either not end up working with them or quitting once they started working with them and observed various bad things.

Repost from EA forum:

Thank you very much for sharing, Chloe.

Ben, Kat, Emerson, and readers of the original post have all noticed that the nature of Ben's process leads to selection against positive observations about Nonlinear. I encourage readers to notice that the reverse might also be true. Examples of selection against negative information include:

  1. Ben has reason to exclude stories that are less objective or have a less strong evidence base. The above comment is a concrete example of this.
    1. There's also something related here about the supposed unreliabil
... (read more)

I have this opposing consideration. I think it does speak to your point -- I gather that part of the reason Alice and Chloe feel this way is that Drew did try to be helpful with respect to their concerns, at least to whatever degree was required for them to ask for him to be shielded from professional consequences.

Here's another (in my view weaker, but perhaps more directly relevant to your point) consideration. To the extent you believe that Nonlinear has been a disfunctional environment, in significant part due to domineering characteristics of senior st... (read more)

My understanding (definitely fallible, but I’ve been quite engaged in this case, and am one of the people Ben interviewed) has been that Alice and Chloe are not concerned about this, and in fact that they both wish to insulate Drew from any negative consequences. This seems to me like an informative and important consideration. (It also gives me reason to think that the benefits of gaining more information about this are less likely to be worth the costs.)

-2Adam Zerner
There were various suspicious/bad things Drew did. Viewed in isolation, that could have a wide spectrum of explanations. Maybe we could call it weak-to-moderate evidence in favor of him being "bad". But then we have to factor in the choice he's made to kinda hang around Emerson and Kat for this long. If we suppose[1] that we are very confident that Emerson and Kat are very bad people who've done very bad things, then, well, that doesn't reflect very favorably on Drew. I think it is moderate-to-strong evidence that Drew is "bad". 1. ^ If you don't believe this, then of course it wouldn't make sense to view his hanging around Emerson and Kat as evidence of him being "bad".
5Ruby
I think if you are a cofounder of a organization and have a front row seat, that even if you were not directly doing the worst things, I want hold you culpable for not noticing or intervening.
3brunoparga
As I understand it – with my only source being Ben's post and a couple of comments that I've read – Drew is also a cofounder of Nonlinear. Also, this was reported: So, based on what we're told, there was romantic entanglement between the employers – Drew included – and Alice, and such relationships, even in the best-case scenario, need to be handled with a lot of caution, and this situation seems to be significantly worse than a best-case scenario.
Answer by Joel Becker00

Enthusiasts of {wine/coffee/whiskey/potato/etc.} tasting?

Speaking of macroeconomics, there's a nice connection here to the famous Lucas critique:

The Lucas critique, named for American economist Robert Lucas's work on macroeconomic policymaking, argues that it is naive to try to predict the effects of a change in economic policy entirely on the basis of relationships observed in historical data, especially highly aggregated historical data.[1] More formally, it states that the decision rules of Keynesian models—such as the consumption function—cannot be considered as structural in the sense of being invariant wit

... (read more)

Interesting, thank you! Has the group gotten around to discussing something like "lessons from contract theory or corporate governance for factored cognition-style proposals" at all?

2Rubi J. Hudson
Not yet! We're now meeting on a monthly schedule, and there has only been one meeting since completing the list here. I'll look into finding a relevant paper on the subject, but if you have any recommendations please let me know.