In my opinion, this is a neutral-to-positive update in favor of broiler welfare reforms (even though it increases the variance of possible outcomes as far as net harm goes). With high uncertainty, my best guess is that the average arthropod lives a net negative life (assuming sentience) — I’m aware you are more undecided about this than I am. Additionally, also with high uncertainty, my best guess is that additional land use from feed reduces arthropod populations, which is also your conclusion. So for me, this is an increase in the expected value of broiler welfare reforms.
Thanks, Tejas. I actually agree. My current best guess is that wild arthropods have negative lives in expectation, although I would say there is only like a 55 % chance of their lives being negative, and still around a 45 % (= 1 − 0.55) chance of their lives being positive.
In my opinion, this is a neutral-to-positive update in favor of broiler welfare reforms (even though it increases the variance of possible outcomes as far as net harm goes). With high uncertainty, my best guess is that the average arthropod lives a net negative life (assuming sentience) — I’m aware you are more undecided about this than I am. Additionally, also with high uncertainty, my best guess is that additional land use from feed reduces arthropod populations, which is also your conclusion. So for me, this is an increase in the expected value of broiler welfare reforms.
Thanks, Tejas. I actually agree. My current best guess is that wild arthropods have negative lives in expectation, although I would say there is only like a 55 % chance of their lives being negative, and still around a 45 % (= 1 − 0.55) chance of their lives being positive.