This post is currently at −1 which seems odd given that this is literally free money with very little catch.
Downvoted as an excuse for you to let your akrasia win and for you not to generate $50 of free money? Probably everyone that values their time at less than $50/hour should do this.
I heartily endorse this, as someone who was previously referred to ING by Louie.
I thought about posting in Discussion, but it’s not really meta.
Also for those people who support SIAI, an actionable idea to reality-test their stated beliefs seems quite beneficial.
[ And for those who don’t want to support SIAI… I titled the article in a transparent way so they can see right away that they wouldn’t want to read it. ]
I voted down from 1 to 0 (before it went negative). Not because of the content, purely because of the misleading title. This isn’t optimally applied philanthropy. It is a quick way to get $50.
I was disappointed when it went to −1. I like the thought of being provided with tips for money making. Just slightly less than I like downvoting misleading titles. :P
I almost wrote “Warning: Unlike what you’re used to on Less Wrong, this post is both short and immediately actionable.”
Maybe I should have. It appears this post violates Less Wronger’s expectations that things be long, complicated, and require nothing but idle thought.
It honestly pains me greatly to know so many different ways I could “improve” this article, all of which involve actually making it needlessly longer and more complicated simply to appease the highly-perverse expectations here that knowledge which is simple to attain is not valuable.
It honestly pains me greatly to know so many different ways I could “improve” this article, all of which involve actually making it needlessly longer and more complicated
It is ironic that you chose to make this reply to a comment that essentially objected to a needless (and misleading) complication in the title. If you left it at “How to Donate $100 to SIAI for Free” and didn’t introduce a complexity (‘Applied Optimal Philanthropy’) that goes against the content then your post would have earned a whole lot more karma and a more positive response.
As for “all of which involve”, the other suggestion you were given here was to post things like this in the discussion section—another thing which has absolutely nothing to do with ‘making it needlessly longer’.
simply to appease the highly-perverse expectations here that knowledge which is simple to attain is not valuable.
No, this is nothing to do with ‘highly-perverse expectations’. If (and this is something that I doubt strongly) people here are particularly prone to believing that knowledge that is simple to attain is not valuable then it is still irrelevant to the criticism that you are so bitter about receiving.
Once again, I like being provided with tips for making money. I don’t like pretentious sulking.
This post is currently at −1 which seems odd given that this is literally free money with very little catch.
Downvoted as an excuse for you to let your akrasia win and for you not to generate $50 of free money? Probably everyone that values their time at less than $50/hour should do this.
I heartily endorse this, as someone who was previously referred to ING by Louie.
I didn’t downvote it, I like ING, and I support the donations. That said, this kind of post fits more in Discussion than on the main page, doesn’t it?
I thought about posting in Discussion, but it’s not really meta.
Also for those people who support SIAI, an actionable idea to reality-test their stated beliefs seems quite beneficial.
[ And for those who don’t want to support SIAI… I titled the article in a transparent way so they can see right away that they wouldn’t want to read it. ]
I voted down from 1 to 0 (before it went negative). Not because of the content, purely because of the misleading title. This isn’t optimally applied philanthropy. It is a quick way to get $50.
I was disappointed when it went to −1. I like the thought of being provided with tips for money making. Just slightly less than I like downvoting misleading titles. :P
I almost wrote “Warning: Unlike what you’re used to on Less Wrong, this post is both short and immediately actionable.”
Maybe I should have. It appears this post violates Less Wronger’s expectations that things be long, complicated, and require nothing but idle thought.
It honestly pains me greatly to know so many different ways I could “improve” this article, all of which involve actually making it needlessly longer and more complicated simply to appease the highly-perverse expectations here that knowledge which is simple to attain is not valuable.
It is ironic that you chose to make this reply to a comment that essentially objected to a needless (and misleading) complication in the title. If you left it at “How to Donate $100 to SIAI for Free” and didn’t introduce a complexity (‘Applied Optimal Philanthropy’) that goes against the content then your post would have earned a whole lot more karma and a more positive response.
As for “all of which involve”, the other suggestion you were given here was to post things like this in the discussion section—another thing which has absolutely nothing to do with ‘making it needlessly longer’.
No, this is nothing to do with ‘highly-perverse expectations’. If (and this is something that I doubt strongly) people here are particularly prone to believing that knowledge that is simple to attain is not valuable then it is still irrelevant to the criticism that you are so bitter about receiving.
Once again, I like being provided with tips for making money. I don’t like pretentious sulking.
A free $50 is an opportunity to apply optimal philanthropy.