This seems to be talking about preventing the accidental creation of people in general. This has no net effect. You need to prevent the creation of suffering people, and encourage the creation of happy people.
I don’t believe the amounts are exactly the same, but I don’t know which is more common/useful.
Also, I believe the amounts are probably similar. As such, you’d get significantly more utility if you try to only create happy people vs. creating more/fewer people.
In the situations above, the people will be created and, happy or not, eliminated as soon as they are no longer needed.
Also, I think it’s not obvious whether we should create more happy people, or just improve the lives of the currently existing people. I kind of get the idea that post-singularity, we will all be combined into One Big Super Person, like reverse Ebborians, and it won’t end up mattering.
In the situations above, the people will be created and, happy or not, eliminated as soon as they are no longer needed.
I don’t mean that they’ll exist permanently. It’s good for a happy person to exist, even if it’s only for a little while.
Also, I think it’s not obvious whether we should create more happy people, or just improve the lives of the currently existing people.
You shouldn’t go out of your way to avoid running programs that create happy people. More generally, if it would be helpful to run such a program, but not quite worth the resources on its own, it may be worth while if it’s a happy person. That will happen about as often as a program being worth while on its own, but not worth running because it creates a sad person.
This seems to be talking about preventing the accidental creation of people in general. This has no net effect. You need to prevent the creation of suffering people, and encourage the creation of happy people.
You believe there are as many possible happy people as people suffering? That seems a little unlikely...
I don’t believe the amounts are exactly the same, but I don’t know which is more common/useful.
Also, I believe the amounts are probably similar. As such, you’d get significantly more utility if you try to only create happy people vs. creating more/fewer people.
In the situations above, the people will be created and, happy or not, eliminated as soon as they are no longer needed.
Also, I think it’s not obvious whether we should create more happy people, or just improve the lives of the currently existing people. I kind of get the idea that post-singularity, we will all be combined into One Big Super Person, like reverse Ebborians, and it won’t end up mattering.
I don’t mean that they’ll exist permanently. It’s good for a happy person to exist, even if it’s only for a little while.
You shouldn’t go out of your way to avoid running programs that create happy people. More generally, if it would be helpful to run such a program, but not quite worth the resources on its own, it may be worth while if it’s a happy person. That will happen about as often as a program being worth while on its own, but not worth running because it creates a sad person.
I see that we have different utility functions.