undefined | Better HN

0 pointsAndrewKemendo4y ago0 comments

I think this misses the point. Even being "less" wrong requires an amount of work that even the best/smartest etc... cannot consistently apply.

I do believe this is zero-sum in that improving on one set of decisions means no applying the same rigor to others.

This is often seen in the form of very smart people also believing conspiracy theories or throwing their hands up around other massive issues. As an example, the "Rationalist crowd" has de-emphasized work on climate change mitigation in favor of more abstract work on AI safety.

0 comments

ret2plt4y ago

> This is often seen in the form of very smart people also believing conspiracy theories or throwing their hands up around other massive issues. As an example, the "Rationalist crowd" has de-emphasized work on climate change mitigation in favor of more abstract work on AI safety.

To be clear, the argument (in rationalist circles) is not that climate change is no big deal, it's that there's already a ton of people worrying about it, so it is better to allocate some extra resources to underfunded problems.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsAndrewKemendo4y ago0 comments

I think this misses the point. Even being "less" wrong requires an amount of work that even the best/smartest etc... cannot consistently apply.

I do believe this is zero-sum in that improving on one set of decisions means no applying the same rigor to others.

0 comments

ret2plt4y ago

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse