Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Pablo Stafforini
371 followers
371 followers
About
Pablo's posts

Post has attachment
" Though Bostrom’s argument supports the conclusion that maximizing humanity’s long term potential is extremely important, it does not provide strong evidence that reducing existential risk is the best way of maximizing humanity’s future potential. There is a much broader class of actions which may affect humanity’s long-term potential, and Bostrom’s argument does not uniquely favor existential risk over other members in this class.

" A version of Bostrom’s argument better supports a more general view: what matters most is that we make path-dependent aspects of the far future go as well as possible. There are important questions about whether we should accept this more general view and what its practical significance is, but this more general view seems to be a strict improvement on the view that minimizing existential risk is what matters most.

" The above points favor very broad, general, and indirect approaches to shaping the far future for the better, rather than thinking about very specific risks and responses, though there are many relevant considerations and the issue is far from settled."

Post has attachment
"There is a bias underlying this scattershot approach to overcoming bias: we are inclined to allocate equal time or value to each category or instance of something we are presented with, even if they are arbitrary, or at least not a good signal of their importance."
Wait while more posts are being loaded