I think market mechanisms in general are an interesting example of group rationality, and thus worthy of study even if we do not advocate for them directly.
For example, here is how studying futarchy could indirectly benefit LessWrong. We could simulate a barter market for impact certificates on posts, so we could retroactively incentivise people to write good posts. And this simulated economy could have simulated futarchy hedge funds in it to make it more efficient.
We don’t know ahead of time the qualitative way in which people will later make impactful posts, so this can’t actually focus on rewarding the posts that would naturally be impactful. Instead it will encourage people to assume that others have good reason for their judgement even if they can’t figure out what those reasons are.
I think market mechanisms in general are an interesting example of group rationality, and thus worthy of study even if we do not advocate for them directly.
For example, here is how studying futarchy could indirectly benefit LessWrong. We could simulate a barter market for impact certificates on posts, so we could retroactively incentivise people to write good posts. And this simulated economy could have simulated futarchy hedge funds in it to make it more efficient.
We don’t know ahead of time the qualitative way in which people will later make impactful posts, so this can’t actually focus on rewarding the posts that would naturally be impactful. Instead it will encourage people to assume that others have good reason for their judgement even if they can’t figure out what those reasons are.