I asked Nick about the choice of theory of value for this paper, which I personally find quite counter to my intuitions. I suggested that perhaps a better theory of value would account for great cultural accomplishments in science, art, music, literature, etc. I, for instance, would trade a lot of “Willy Loman”-types for a single Leonard Euler.
He spoke somewhat dismissively of this idea, saying “if we survive, there will be plenty of time for guitars and crayons.”
I think this rather proves my point though. If we value having time for guitars and crayons, then we need to survive. Thus, it’s worth sacrificing a lot of current lives in order to improve the odds that humanity survives at all.
In the same discussion he said that he had explicitly avoided considering existential risk in this work, and that he intended to consider existential risk at some point in the future. Seems to me like this work is fairly meaningless without that most important consideration addressed.
Overall a disappointing paper, and disappointing responses.
I asked Nick about the choice of theory of value for this paper, which I personally find quite counter to my intuitions. I suggested that perhaps a better theory of value would account for great cultural accomplishments in science, art, music, literature, etc. I, for instance, would trade a lot of “Willy Loman”-types for a single Leonard Euler.
He spoke somewhat dismissively of this idea, saying “if we survive, there will be plenty of time for guitars and crayons.”
I think this rather proves my point though. If we value having time for guitars and crayons, then we need to survive. Thus, it’s worth sacrificing a lot of current lives in order to improve the odds that humanity survives at all.
In the same discussion he said that he had explicitly avoided considering existential risk in this work, and that he intended to consider existential risk at some point in the future. Seems to me like this work is fairly meaningless without that most important consideration addressed.
Overall a disappointing paper, and disappointing responses.