In addition to the points that I made in my other response to your comment, I would add that the SIAI staff have not created an environment which welcomes criticism from outsiders.
The points in my other response were well considered and yet as I write, the response has been down voted three times so that it is now hidden from view.
I see Eliezer’s initial response to XiXiDu’s post Should I believe what the SIAI claims? as evidence that the SIAI staff have gotten in the habit of dismissing criticisms out of hand whenever they question the credibility of the critic. This habit is justified up to a point, but my interactions with the SIAI staff have convinced me that (as a group) they go too way far, creating a selection effect which subjects themselves to confirmation bias and group think.
In SIAI’s defense, I’ll make the following three points:
I see these things as weak indications that SIAI may take my criticisms seriously. Nevertheless, I perceive SIAI’s openness to criticism up until this point to be far lower than GiveWell’s openness to criticism up until this point.
As you’ll notice, the GiveWell staff are not arbitrarily responsive to criticism—if they were then they would open themselves up to the possibility of never getting anything done. But their standard for responsiveness is much higher than anything that I’ve seen from SIAI. For example, compare Holden’s response to Laura Deaton’s (strong) criticism with Eliezer’s response to my top level post.
In order for me to feel comfortable donating to SIAI I would need to see SIAI staff exhibiting a level of responsiveness and engagement comparable to the level that the GiveWell staff have exhibited in the links above.
In addition to the points that I made in my other response to your comment, I would add that the SIAI staff have not created an environment which welcomes criticism from outsiders.
The points in my other response were well considered and yet as I write, the response has been down voted three times so that it is now hidden from view.
I see Eliezer’s initial response to XiXiDu’s post Should I believe what the SIAI claims? as evidence that the SIAI staff have gotten in the habit of dismissing criticisms out of hand whenever they question the credibility of the critic. This habit is justified up to a point, but my interactions with the SIAI staff have convinced me that (as a group) they go too way far, creating a selection effect which subjects themselves to confirmation bias and group think.
In SIAI’s defense, I’ll make the following three points:
•Michael Vassar corresponded with me extensively in response to the criticisms of SIAI which I raised in the comments to my post (One reason) why capitalism is much maligned and Roko’s post Public Choice and the Altruist’s Burden.
•As prase remarks, the fact that my top level posts have not been censored are an indication that “LW is still far from Objectivism.”
•SIAI staff member Jasen sent me a private message thanking me for making my two posts Existential Risk and Public Relations and Other Existential Risks and explaining that SIAI plans to address these points in the future.
I see these things as weak indications that SIAI may take my criticisms seriously. Nevertheless, I perceive SIAI’s openness to criticism up until this point to be far lower than GiveWell’s openness to criticism up until this point.
For examples of GiveWell’s openness to criticism, see Holden Karnofsky’s back and forth with Laura Deaton here and the threads on the GiveWell research mailing list on Cost-Effectiveness Estimates, Research Priorities and Plans and Environmental Concerns and International Aid as well as Holden’s posting Population growth & health.
As you’ll notice, the GiveWell staff are not arbitrarily responsive to criticism—if they were then they would open themselves up to the possibility of never getting anything done. But their standard for responsiveness is much higher than anything that I’ve seen from SIAI. For example, compare Holden’s response to Laura Deaton’s (strong) criticism with Eliezer’s response to my top level post.
In order for me to feel comfortable donating to SIAI I would need to see SIAI staff exhibiting a level of responsiveness and engagement comparable to the level that the GiveWell staff have exhibited in the links above.