What probability of success do you need to reach … given the consequences of failure?
How can we estimate such things, if the scientific method is forbidden to us?
Saul Schleimer
Karma: 13
“Premature optimisation is the root of all evil.” -- Don Knuth.
Let us suppose that free will exists. So the universe is not deterministic. So those who built the current magical infrastructure could not know that their choices are optimal—they could only hope. So we may ask: is it not possible that we might improve upon their work?
[Edit] Perhaps more to the point, if everything is so well optimised, why there are simultaneously (a) “many bright students” and (b) many ways for them to tragically destroy themselves and their loved ones? Well, I suppose that this is a very old question. Namely, why is there a tree of knowledge with a big sign on it saying “do not eat”?
You ask “But how can I be confident that… it’s the same conscious experience?”
So, how do you feel about going to sleep at night? Because the “you” that goes to sleep is definitely not the same as the “you” who wakes up in the morning. For example, the brain creates long-term memories during sleep. Conversely, you can’t “remain the same person” by refusing to sleep; that instead transforms you into a different person who has unpleasant hallucinations.
In short—the constancy of identity is unattainable. The most we can hope for is the continuity of identity. And even that is denied to us for eight hours a night.
The first example here is the fossil fuel industry. They are a threat to society itself. This was obvious to me after looking at average monthly temperature data collected since the 1850’s. Of course (considered as monoliths) fossil fuel companies have “known” this since at least the 1950’s. Thus we can reasonably say that they are performing a deliberate slow motion murder of human civilisation (and, possibly, of all mammals bigger than a bread box).
Of course there are other examples. You write
[companies] won’t be …. killing people who don’t buy enough of their products
The tobacco industry kills 7 million people every year. So it is more a matter of “killing people who buy too much of their products”.
Perhaps your counter-point will be “Negative externalities are hard to feel when they are slow and diffuse. So my mom will reject these.” My counter is to say “Negative externalities are easier to feel when the impact is constant and vast.” Examples: a relative with lung cancer, a region of your country that recently had a huge forest fire, and fecal matter in rivers.
“Omelas Is Perfectly Misread” —> “The ones who misread Omelas”. :)
Your Marcus Valerius Corvus used the scientific method:
And you erased him. What lesson were we supposed to hear?