Thinking like a super-villain is the wrong advice to give to this demographic since it will prime them for counter-productive patterns of behaviour that work in fiction.
Voldemort
Karma: 82
Finally, this dire warning: Concretely imagining worlds much better than your present-day real life, may suck out your soul like an emotional vacuum cleaner. (See Seduced by Imagination.) Fun Theory is dangerous, use it with caution, you have been warned.
An obvious application of Fun Theory is its use in designing virtual worlds that suck out other people’s souls for fun and profit! Then donating that to optimal charity to make up for disutility. Enslave the irrational for the greater good!
(playing a simple caricature is much easier, but Voldemort does not strike me as such)
Why thank you, I do try.
One of the things I’ve noticed is that, for the most part, people play characters that think like they do.
Except for stealing everything that isn’t nailed down you mean?
To step out of character, my regular account has 2000+ karma on LW and I don’t think I’ve been acused of sociopathy before. I guess I’m just that good at hiding it.
(Older well known RP accounts (ala Clippy) don’t really seem to be attracting much attention from them though. Perhaps I should get myself a regular account?)
Well this is splendid! I should have a far easier time concealing myself and my intentions here than on nearly any other venue.
It seems Lucid fox has a point. LW isn’t that heavily dominated by US based users, also dosen’t it seem wise for LW users to try and avoid such uses when thinking of difficult problems of ethics or instrumental rationality?
Correct, though I prefer to think of it as using another man’s head to run a viable enough version of me so that I may participate in the rationalist discourse here.
I hate to repeat myself but let me ease your mind.
Ha ha ha. I find it amusing that you should ask me of all people about this.
Only I can live forever. - is a powerful ethical argument if there is a slim but realistic chance of you actually achieving this.
...or perhaps just the raw materials for another horcrux.
Despite the risk of cluttering I even made a posts who’s only function was to clear up ambiguity:
Ah, even muggles can be sensible occasionally.
I thought it was more than probable the vast majority of readers here would be familiar with me. Perhaps I expect too much of them. I do that sometimes expect too much of people, it is arguably one of my great flaws.
I’m just not sure if you really mean it when you say you’d trade 28 mortal lives for a single immortal one.
Ha ha ha. I find it amusing that you should ask me of all people about this. I’d push a big red button killing through neglect 28 cute Romanian orphans if it meant a 1% or 0.5% or even 0.3% chance of revival in an age that has defeated ageing. It would free up my funds to either fund more research, or offer to donate the money to cryopreserve a famous individual (offering it to lots of them, one is bound to accept, and him accepting would be a publicity boost) or perhaps just the raw materials for another horcrux.
Also why employ children in the example? Speaking of adults the idea seemed fine, children should probably be less of a problem since they aren’t fully persons in exactly the same measure adults are no? It seems so attractive to argue to argue that killing a child costs the world more potential happy productive man years, yet have you noted that in many societies the average expected life span is so very low mostly because of the high child mortality? A 20 year old man in such a society has already passed a “great filter” so to speak. This is probably true in many states in Africa. And since we are on the subject…
There are more malnourished people in India than in all of sub-Saharan Africa, yet people always invoke an African example when wishing to “fight hunger”. This is true of say efforts to eradicate malaria or making AIDS drugs affordable or “fighting poverty” or education intiatives, ect. I wonder why? Are they more photogenic?Does helping Africans somehow signal more altruism than helping say Cambodians? I wonder.
Ah, even muggles can be sensible occasionally.
Unfortunately, I came installed with a fairly broken evaluator of chances, which tends to consistently evaluate the probability of X happening to person P differently if P = me than if it isn’t, all else being equal… and it’s frequently true that my evaluations with respect to other people are more accurate than those with respect to me.
Then work towards the immortality of another. Dedicate your life to it.
You have not considered this thoroughly.
What are 28 mortal lives for one that is immortal? If I was asked to choose between the life of some being that shall live for thousands of years or the lives of thirty something people who shall live perhaps 60 or 70 years, counting the happy productive hours of life seems to favour the long lived. Of course they technically also have a tiny chance of living that long, but honestly what are the odds that absent any additional investment (which will have the opportunity cost of other short lived people), they have of matching the mentioned being’s longevity?
Now suppose I could be relatively sure that the long lived entity would work towards making the universe, as much as possible, a place that in which I, as I am today, could find some value in, but of those thirty something individuals I would know little except that they are likley to be at the very best, at about the human average when it comes to this task.
What is the difference between a certainty of a two thousand year lifespan, or the 10% chance of a 20 000 year one? Or even a 0.5% chance of a 400 000 year life span? Perhaps the being can not psychologically handle living that much longer, but having assurances that it would do its best to self-modify so it could dosen’t seem unreasonable.
Why should I then privilege the 28 because the potentially long lived being just happens to be me?
Only I can live forever. - is a powerful ethical argument if there is a slim but realistic chance of you actually achieving this.
They eventually do. But they often start with an origin story that makes little sense and during the story they often end up becoming stronger and stronger right up until the end.