Maybe_a

• Maybe_aDec 14, 2013, 5:58 PM

  2 points

  on: an eth­i­cal puz­zle about brain emulation

  A is not bad because torturing a person and then restoring their initial state has precisely same consequences as forging own memory of torturing a person and restoring their initial state.

• Maybe_aFeb 9, 2013, 4:59 PM

  0 points

  in reply to: DanArmak’s comment on: A brief his­tory of eth­i­cally con­cerned scientists

  Well, it seems somewhat unfair to judge the decision on information not available for decision-maker, however, I fail to see how is that an ‘implicit premise’.

  I didn’t think Geneva convention was that old, and, actually updating on it makes Immerwahr decision score worse, due to lower expected amount of saved lives (through lower chance of having chemical weapons used).

  Hopefully, roleplaying this update made me understand that in some value systems it’s worth it. Most likely, E(\Delta victims to Haber’s war efforts) > 1.

• Maybe_aFeb 9, 2013, 7:17 AM

  0 points

  on: A brief his­tory of eth­i­cally con­cerned scientists

  Standing against unintended pandemics, atomic warfare and other extinction threatenting events have been quite good of an idea in retrospect. Those of us working of scientific advances shall indeed ponder the consequences.

  But Immerwahr-Haber episode is just an unrelated tearjerker. Really, inventing process for creation of nitrogen fertilizers is so more useful than shooting oneself in the heart. Also, chemical warfare turned out not to kill much people since WWI, so such sacrifice is rather irrelevant.

• Maybe_aFeb 9, 2013, 6:38 AM

  −4 points

  in reply to: Jack’s comment on: Philo­soph­i­cal Landmines

  “The universe is too complex for it to have been created randomly.”

  You’re right. Exactly.

  Unless there are on order of $2^KolmogorovComplexity(Universe)$ universes, the chance of it being constructed randomly is exceedingly low.

  Please, do continue.