All of Aidan_Kierans's Comments + Replies

I think at least some people do, but I don't have a good argument or evidence to support that claim. Even if your only terminal values are more traditional conceptions of utility, diversity still serves those values really well. A homogenous population is not just more boring, but also less resilient to change (and pathogens, depending on the degree of homogeneity). I think it would be shortsighted and overconfident to design an optimal, identical population since they would lack the resilience and variety of experience to maintain that optimally once any problems appeared.

1Jozdien
Boring matters if they consider it a negative, which isn't a necessity (boredom being something we can edit if needed). Re: resilience, I agree that those are good reasons to not try anything like this today or in the immediate future. But at a far enough point where we understand our environment with enough precision to not have to overly worry about external threats, would that still hold? Or do you think that kind of future isn't possible? (Realistically, and outside the simplified scenario, AGI could take care of any future problems without our needing to trouble ourselves).

You're right that Ballantyne mainly focuses on epistemic trespassing as something related to question answering rather than question posing. I think this is related to his definition of a field as "an extremely narrow set of questions”; obviously trying to answer a set of questions without any of the relevant evidence and skills (that someone who works in the field has) would be trespassing. On the other hand, asking questions you're not qualified to answer seems a lot more benign; there's no expectation of reliability and little expectation of responsibil... (read more)

0Josh Smith-Brennan
Epistemic Status:  My liberal arts education didn't specialize in philosophy, although I've read a lot in a lot of different fields over the years, although I don't have a list of ready sources to pull from aside from what I remember from my reading and youtube videos. Plus I grew up in a circle of highly respected academics and researchers, so I think I know things. I'm pretty sure I understand what you mean, and I think I agree with your conclusions. I Still have some small questions. My original question was initially about trespassing between established academic domains, and the business or governmental and non-governmental organizations that use their research. But I think the route you've gone is also incredibly important to consider. Well said too. I think I understand your point well, and it seems very reasonable, and you've given me some room to think about and respond to what you've written, which I appreciate. My original question was about whether Epistemic Trespassing also includes instances of asking questions of experts outside the questioners field of expertise (FOE?), in addition to providing answers outside the questioners FOE.   I might be jumping the gun, but to me this sort of seems ambiguous, in that the 9/11 truther who focuses on 9/11 might be said to also have an extremely narrow set of questions if they focus strictly on the metallurgical properties concerned (maybe?)  But additionally, if it's the case that a field also requires answers, then it seems to be by necessity that fields also require experts to provide the answers, and if an authoritative field is populated by experts whose answers to the fields questions, provide some proof of truth (POT), than what would be considered pseudoscience would be a field whose experts provide answers which don't reliably provide some POT? So maybe it is also the sorts of questions being asked, and not just the answers provided, which could be taken to be pseudoscience? But not all Epistemic

Maybe there's a combination of birth and environment conditions that maximize utility for an individual, but we may have different values for society in general which would lead to a lower overall utility for a society of identical people. For example, we generally value diversity, and I think the utility function we use for society in general would probably return a lower result for a population of identical optimally born/raised people than for a diverse population of slightly-less-than-optimally born/raised people. 

1Jozdien
If we hold diversity as a terminal value then yes, a diverse population of less-than-optimal people is better.  But don't we generally see diversity less as a terminal value than something that's useful because it approximates terminal values?  

If I'm understanding you correctly, it seems like your worry with applying (D1) to pseudoscience is that it feeds into confirmation bias by making you feel like you're right to dismiss something you already don't think is useful (in a way that you wouldn't dismiss it if you did think it was useful). As I summarize in the next paragraph, Ballantyne agrees with you that it's easy to apply (D1) too often, but maybe even this case that's supposed to be an example of using (D1) correctly is problematic.

Being charitable to Ballantyne, we can imagine that his "co... (read more)

I'm not sure whether this is true of chemistry, but the research process you describe certainly sounds plausible. As you say, there may be many cases in which the distribution of labor doesn't matter, because researching different theories looks the same.  One area in which researching different theories looks different is research into what killed the dinosaurs. Producing geological evidence relevant to the hypothesis that volcanoes killed the dinosaurs means digging at different sites from those you would investigate for evidence about whether a met... (read more)

1Jay
Fair enough.  I'm a chemist by training, so I described what I know.

Other possibilities for earning money is to try to find a thesis at other institutions that pay their students like CWI, Mila,,that or CHAI in Berkeley (for all these, I know students who did their thesis there).

Prospective student here; what finding a thesis at another institution entail? Would a student who wanted to do this begin by emailing professors at these institutions about their research, applying to their "visiting researcher" programs, or something else?

1Master Programs ML/AI
Hi Aidan_Kierans, In the three cases I know, it went like this: CWI: the student got in contact with a researcher from CWI who was willing to supervise a thesis.  CHAI: Same. Mila: Same. Note that for CHAI and Mila, you may need recommendation letters if you go over their usual routes of research internships. I myself also applied to Mila and FHI and got recommendation letters for this, though in the end I was not able to get accepted there.

I may be nine years too late to make any kind of difference, but I would caution against any strong attachment to H.P. Lovecraft in particular due to his astounding racism. His fears about the unknown and the "others" are perhaps most apparently race-related in The Shadow Over Innsmouth (it's easy to see how the fishmen are an allegorical representation of people with skin colors Lovecraft didn't like) but in general I think the fact that Lovecraft was super racist is a compelling reason not to hold him up as an icon of rationality, even if some of the non-racist or only-racist-in-context themes of his work are valuable or relatable.

America has contracted the maze disease, and it continues to fester. In other words, even if large corporations with deep hierarchies are actually less prevalent than they once were, the maze cultures in those that exist are far, far more developed.

Some evidence in support of this hypothesis (and by extension, Zvi's claim that mazes are on the rise) is the prevalence of oligopolies in America and the world. It's hard to buy affordable food without indirectly buying from Nestle for example, and in many of America's food deserts the only nearby place to buy ... (read more)

3abramdemski
My contention (based on The Refragmentation) is that this is much less true than it was in 1950; if not in food, then still, in many other sectors of the market. But it's possible that this wan only the case for a period around the 90s or something, and the fragmentation has reversed in recent years. I've never heard of DistroKid and expected you to say BandCamp or SoundCloud. This is minor evidence against the claim. But some variety doesn't mean a lot of variety (IE there could be just three choices). Still, musicians are far less beholden to these platforms than they were to big record companies of the past, which dictated musical fashion to a far greater degree. But again, these are newer companies, so we need a different explanation of why they have deeper mazes. Definitely agree with this one. The choice  between driving for traditional taxi companies, uber, or lyft isn't much of a choice. These are newer companies, but in this case there's a ready explanation for why they have deeper mazes: many relatively small and local taxi companies have been replaced by just two ride-share companies. I don't know the statistics, but it would make perfect sense if these companies have deeper mazes simply because they are larger than traditional taxi companies. The same explanation holds for amazon vs everything it replaces.