Neel Krishnaswami has already said pretty much everything I’m thinking.
From a rhetorical and logical perspective, it would have been much better if Eliezer had presented an experiment in which the participants were asked to choose between abstracted types of harm specially constructed to avoid all of the issues people have brought up… and still chose irrationally.
What’s ‘rational’ in the example he did use is far from clear.
Oh, and his “I didn’t have to do the math” is absurd, not only on its own grounds, but in the context of his broader points. Eliezer is normally an advocate for doing the math, and how he’s brushing it off.
Neel Krishnaswami has already said pretty much everything I’m thinking.
From a rhetorical and logical perspective, it would have been much better if Eliezer had presented an experiment in which the participants were asked to choose between abstracted types of harm specially constructed to avoid all of the issues people have brought up… and still chose irrationally.
What’s ‘rational’ in the example he did use is far from clear.
Oh, and his “I didn’t have to do the math” is absurd, not only on its own grounds, but in the context of his broader points. Eliezer is normally an advocate for doing the math, and how he’s brushing it off.