This seems true and useful to me, Iâm surprised at the low agreement and karma scores!
I discuss another example here, where (using your framing) we cannot rule out that we are in the hinge of history, and since the stakes would then be so high, we ought to act significantly on that basis.
Thanks, yeah, I like your point there that âfalse negatives are costlier than false positives in this caseâ, and so even <50% credence can warrant significant action. (I wouldnât literally say we should âact as if 3H is trueâ in all respectsâas per Nunoâs comment, uncertainty may justify some compounding âpatient philanthropyâ, which could have high stakes if the hinge comes later. But thatâs a minor quibble: I take myself to be broadly in agreement with your larger gist.)
This seems true and useful to me, Iâm surprised at the low agreement and karma scores!
I discuss another example here, where (using your framing) we cannot rule out that we are in the hinge of history, and since the stakes would then be so high, we ought to act significantly on that basis.
Interested if you agree with this example.
Thanks, yeah, I like your point there that âfalse negatives are costlier than false positives in this caseâ, and so even <50% credence can warrant significant action. (I wouldnât literally say we should âact as if 3H is trueâ in all respectsâas per Nunoâs comment, uncertainty may justify some compounding âpatient philanthropyâ, which could have high stakes if the hinge comes later. But thatâs a minor quibble: I take myself to be broadly in agreement with your larger gist.)