LessWrong debate: should you take naive positions on all crucial considerations?
jessi_cata · x · 2026-10-23
An AI-safety thread on avoiding "galaxy brained reasoning" by taking naive positions on all crucial considerations. jessicata questions how much cultural variation exists on such positions, arguing the QALY-based stance in population ethics seems like the convergent naive position but leads to the repugnant conclusion if taken to its logical end. Links to the LessWrong post on whether slower economic growth improves the odds of FAI.
More from AGI Musings
- lcamtuf: ~70% of infosec punditry is now AI-generated, and he deleted his own old blog over it — joshua_saxe · 2026-10-23
- NYT: What 1931's labor disruption can teach us about AI's impact on work — danielrock · 2026-10-23
- AI researchers clash over whether lab "safety" amounts to coercive control — joshalbrecht · 2026-10-23
- Derya Unutmaz resurfaces 2025 prediction: AI skeptics' critiques won't age well — DeryaTR_ · 2026-10-23
- Only 4% of CIOs have plans for human-agent workforce, report finds — rseroter · 2026-10-23
- Anil Seth wins Berggruen Prize: consciousness is of life, not computation — anilkseth · 2026-10-23