That's the take away I get. It's a philosophical justification to being as greedy and heartless as possible because in the future the money you got from burning down the world could potentially be used to reverse that damage.
We will use our big brains to draw bold conclusions about the most effective use of money, without the burden of conventional wisdom.
For our first bold conclusion we have determined that all of the world's money should be in the hands of people with big brains who intend to draw bold conclusions about the most effective use of money, without the burden of conventional wisdom.
This concludes the planning phase. There will be an additional planning phase once we've collected all of the money, we promise.
"Sorry I can't it's unethical to give more to you just because you are closer to me, I need to do some excel sheets and maximize my mosquito net donations to africa."
They define "altruism" as "don't actually do anything about the problems of today, so that you can do more about them tomorrow". But does tomorrow ever come?
Bluntly, I trust Jesus more than them. And in Luke 16:10, Jesus said, "One who is faithful in a very little is also faithful in much, and one who is dishonest in a very little is also dishonest in much."
I think you got it backwards. Their motivation is this "I must look charitable, but if there are no problems, then there is no reason to donate, hence I must operate at both ends. I must create problems by earning money and then solve them by spending money."
That certainly seems to be the motivation of AI companies warning us about the threat of AI to humanity, while working as hard as possible to bring it about.
Very few billionaires are EAs. A few more have a generally EA approach to their giving. But billionaires are generally not that keen on EA because it would involve donating almost all their money.
If you're a regular person and you start taking an EA approach to the world, that is probably not going to look like donating almost all your money: most people don't have that much disposable income, and applying your working hours directly to important problems will often be more effective. But if you have billions of dollars you totally should be trying to figure out how to give most of it away effectively.
Basically EA operates as an insurance system for billionaires who want to gain enough wealth and power to collapse humanity until they need to insurance against the collapse of humanity so that they can keep extracting anyway.
That's definitely how it comes across now. Especially with all the TESCREAL weirdness that gets attached to it. But originally, EA really was extremely altruist. Early pioneers were practically Francis of Assissi-style vow of poverty people, giving away the majority of their income to the worthiest cause they could find.
But somewhere along the way it attracted the attention of tech bros, billionaires and AI believers, and the whole thing seems to have gotten corrupted way beyond recognition. I think it started by telling people that instead of becoming a volunteer, they could also become a stock trader and donate all of their income to fund a dozen volunteers. And once you've got that kind of money, well, isn't just donating 10% already pretty good? And then came the AI concerns, which mostly seem to have become a reason to hype up irresponsible AI use, rather than the opposite (note that both OpenAI and Anthropic were founded based on the concerns for the threat AI might pose to humanity), and then the Longtermist idea that the concerns of potentially trillions of humans in the very distant future should outweigh the concerns of the mere billions alive today, lead to basically an excuse not to help people today anymore. Also, all those millionaire and billionaire tech bros are still millionaires and billionaires. Is there any EA adherent who has given away that level of wealth?
So while the poverty and altruism of the early pioneers was extremely inspiring, the current visible public face of EA is exactly the opposite.
drywater2 · · focus · HN ↗
cogman10 · · focus · HN ↗
furyofantares · · focus · HN ↗
For our first bold conclusion we have determined that all of the world's money should be in the hands of people with big brains who intend to draw bold conclusions about the most effective use of money, without the burden of conventional wisdom.
This concludes the planning phase. There will be an additional planning phase once we've collected all of the money, we promise.
TZubiri · · focus · HN ↗
"Sorry I can't it's unethical to give more to you just because you are closer to me, I need to do some excel sheets and maximize my mosquito net donations to africa."
AnimalMuppet · · focus · HN ↗
Bluntly, I trust Jesus more than them. And in Luke 16:10, Jesus said, "One who is faithful in a very little is also faithful in much, and one who is dishonest in a very little is also dishonest in much."
imtringued · · focus · HN ↗
mcv · · focus · HN ↗
jefftk · · focus · HN ↗
BLKNSLVR · · focus · HN ↗
jefftk · · focus · HN ↗
BLKNSLVR · · focus · HN ↗
imtringued · · focus · HN ↗
Basically EA operates as an insurance system for billionaires who want to gain enough wealth and power to collapse humanity until they need to insurance against the collapse of humanity so that they can keep extracting anyway.
mcv · · focus · HN ↗
But somewhere along the way it attracted the attention of tech bros, billionaires and AI believers, and the whole thing seems to have gotten corrupted way beyond recognition. I think it started by telling people that instead of becoming a volunteer, they could also become a stock trader and donate all of their income to fund a dozen volunteers. And once you've got that kind of money, well, isn't just donating 10% already pretty good? And then came the AI concerns, which mostly seem to have become a reason to hype up irresponsible AI use, rather than the opposite (note that both OpenAI and Anthropic were founded based on the concerns for the threat AI might pose to humanity), and then the Longtermist idea that the concerns of potentially trillions of humans in the very distant future should outweigh the concerns of the mere billions alive today, lead to basically an excuse not to help people today anymore. Also, all those millionaire and billionaire tech bros are still millionaires and billionaires. Is there any EA adherent who has given away that level of wealth?
So while the poverty and altruism of the early pioneers was extremely inspiring, the current visible public face of EA is exactly the opposite.