Note that “our coherent extrapolated volition is our wish if we knew more, were smarter...” etc . The EVs of yourself and that suicidal fanatic should be pretty well aligned—you both probably value freedom
No. I will NOT assume that extrapolating the volition of people with vastly different preferences to me will magically make them compatible with mine. The universe is just not that convenient. Pretending it is while implementing a FAI is suicidally naive.
Can I also ask you to re-read CEV, paying particular attention to Q4 and Q8 in the PAQ section? They deal with the instinctive discomfort of including everyone in the CEV.
I’m familiar with the document, as well as approximately everything else said on the subject here, even in passing. This includes Eliezer propozing ad-hoc work arounds to the “What if people are jerks?” problem.
Quite right, don’t assume. Think it through. Then you may be less inclined to pepper your posts with non-sequiturs like “magically”, “pretending” and “naive”.
I’m familiar with the document, as well as approximately everything else said on the subject here, even in passing.
Great! But, IMHO, you have a tendency to miss the point. So:
Can I also ask you to re-read CEV, paying particular attention to Q4 and Q8 in the PAQ section? They deal with the instinctive discomfort of including everyone in the CEV.
No. I will NOT assume that extrapolating the volition of people with vastly different preferences to me will magically make them compatible with mine. The universe is just not that convenient. Pretending it is while implementing a FAI is suicidally naive.
I’m familiar with the document, as well as approximately everything else said on the subject here, even in passing. This includes Eliezer propozing ad-hoc work arounds to the “What if people are jerks?” problem.
Quite right, don’t assume. Think it through. Then you may be less inclined to pepper your posts with non-sequiturs like “magically”, “pretending” and “naive”.
Great! But, IMHO, you have a tendency to miss the point. So: