Interesting! What do you think a “bi” listing can signal? Openness to experience?
Edited for clarity. Also: I’m not complaining, but I am genuinely curious as to why this comment has been downvoted. Is this a sensitive topic?
Nick_Roy
Karma: 458
Since it’s difficult to predict the date of the invention of AGI, has SI thought about/made plans for how to work on the FAI problem for many decades, or perhaps even centuries, if necessary?
Agreed on the excellence of “Why Spock is Not Rational”. This chapter is introductory enough that I deployed it on Facebook.
Okay, but only 3.5%. I wonder how many are newbies who haven’t read many of the sequences yet, and I wonder how many are simulists.
What surprised you about the survey’s results regarding religion?
I currently route around this by being an ethical egoist, though I admit that I still have a lot to learn when it comes to metaethics. (And I ’m not just leaving it at “I still have a lot to learn”, either—I’m taking active steps to learn more, and I’m not just signalling that, and I’m not just signalling that I’m not signalling that, etc.)!
I ran across OB while being horribly akrasic on Reddit a few years ago.
My thoughts on further social business opportunities: how about rationality consulting? If SI/LessWrong can establish enough credibility as rationalists this is worth money to both non-profit organizations and for-profit businesses, as well as potentially to consumers (as with Eliezer’s rationality books). Rationality consulting would probably have to be done for free at first, of course. As a secondary benefit, this would also help with the ongoing effort to measure the impact rationality training has on an individual or an organization.
On a meta level, offering a prize may be a good way generate social business ideas, since the prize would more than pay for itself if the idea is profitable enough. Resource strategy consultants for non-profit organizations do exist, and business entrepreneurs (having expertise in resource strategies from another angle) might also like the idea of a prize.
This is also a topic that SI’s Volunteering program can address, which I notice in the Strategic Plan that SI plans on growing.
Luke responded that “actually, a rationality teaching/consulting business is already in the works! That’s the ‘Rationality Org’ we plan on spinning off from Singularity Institute.”
That’s an excellent point. I wonder if it’s too late at this point for a renaming, or not?
Sorry about that! It’s difficult (for me at least) to express tone over the Internet. I’ll have to practice that.
Okay, that’s a good point, too. However, do you have any social business suggestions in addition to that?
Edited to add: I apologize if my tone came off as being negative here. Such was not my intent.
Okay, that’s a good point. Do you have any social business suggestions on top of that, though?
Edited to add: I apologize if my tone came off as being negative here. Such was not my intent.
SI and Social Business
Non-profit organizations like SI need robust, sustainable resource strategies. Donations and grants are not reliable. According to my university Social Entrepreneurship course, social businesses are the best resource strategy available. The Singularity Summit is a profitable and expanding example of a social business.
My question: is SI planning on creating more social businesses (either related or unrelated to the organization’s mission) to address long-term funding needs?
By the way, I appreciate SI working on its transparency. According to my studies, transparency and accountability are also essential to the long-term success of a non-profit organization.
What strikes me most about this post: the enthusiasm! I find it refreshing for this site and appropriate for this subject matter. Congratulations on successfully feeling rational, D_Malik.
Why not use several different methodologies on GiveWell, instead of just one, since there is some disagreement over methodologies? I can understand giving your favorite methodology top billing, of course (both because you believe it is best and it is your site and also to avoid confusion among donors), but there seems to be room for more than one.
True. It might be interesting to see if any hidden commonalities among Less Wrongians exist, however, if the “Other” option comes along with a “fill-in-the-blank” field. It might also be a good idea to include this “Other” option in addition to the other options to avoid everyone checking “Other”.
Taken. Thanks Yvain, I appreciate this effort!
Nitpick: why no “Other” categories for Participation and Expertise?
I’m considering the possibility of an experimental treatment becoming available during those two months that could save the terminally ill patient from dying of that illness. Being alive would then allow the possibility of new life extension treatments, would could lead to a very long life indeed.
This would be a conjunction of possibilities, so I realize that the overall possibility of a terminally person transitioning to a very long-lived person is slim, but even a slim chance of living for a very long time is worth almost any degree of suffering. If no experimental treatment becomes available during those two months (the likely outcome), cryonics upon death is the next best legal option. If suicide + cryonics were legal, it would make sense to try that if no experimental treatment were even in the research pipeline, but it’s not legal, and so no cryonics organization would go through with it.
Also, as a transhumanist, I don’t accept that most of us are eventually going to die of illnesses with fairly miserable end states.
Fascinating, thank you. I also realize that I should have Googled that before asking.