Huh, very sad this post is downvoted. I disagree with a lot of it, but it seemed like a genuine attempt at argument and reasoning and thinking about stuff, and on the margin much more valuable than a pro-democrats post, which I am pretty sure would not have been downvoted in the same way.
seemed like a genuine attempt at argument and reasoning and thinking about stuff
I think any genuine attempt needs to acknowledge that Trump tried to overturn the election he lost.
I’m all for discussing the policies, but here it’s linked to “EAs should vote for Trump” and that demands that it assesses all the important consequences. (Also, arguing for a political candidate is against Forum norms. I wouldn’t like a pro-Harris case)
Yeah, I agree that this is the biggest hole in the article and think that omission is indeed pretty bad (and I commented with basically exactly that on Twitter a few days ago).
it seemed like a genuine attempt at argument and reasoning and thinking about stuff
I disagree in absolute terms (a lot of these things seem like a stretch), but I think it’s plausible/probable that it’s better than average than a pro-Democrat post, and likely the latter will be upvoted way more.
Fortunately nobody has written a pro-Harris post for us to directly analyze the counterfactual.
I also disagree that this post seems genuine. The author is clearly well informed and yet has left out the most glaring red flags of another Trump presidency, instead painting a picture of what a typical rational actor at the head of a democractic goverment might do. This feels misinformed at best and misleading at worst.
I think it’s a mistake to try to predict Donald Trump’s behavior in a second term based on any previous policy-specific statements or actions as he has clearly demonstrated his propensity to lie and say anything in order to gain power. If elected, Trump will consolidate power (as he already has to an alarming extent) and will no longer need to satisfy constituents (other than the ultra-rich). He will see AI as just another tool he can wield to gain and maintain his own power. Would you have wanted Hitler to have gotten the atomic bomb first if he had pledged to regulate nuclear power?
Huh, very sad this post is downvoted. I disagree with a lot of it, but it seemed like a genuine attempt at argument and reasoning and thinking about stuff, and on the margin much more valuable than a pro-democrats post, which I am pretty sure would not have been downvoted in the same way.
I think any genuine attempt needs to acknowledge that Trump tried to overturn the election he lost.
I’m all for discussing the policies, but here it’s linked to “EAs should vote for Trump” and that demands that it assesses all the important consequences. (Also, arguing for a political candidate is against Forum norms. I wouldn’t like a pro-Harris case)
Yeah, I agree that this is the biggest hole in the article and think that omission is indeed pretty bad (and I commented with basically exactly that on Twitter a few days ago).
I disagree in absolute terms (a lot of these things seem like a stretch), but I think it’s plausible/probable that it’s better than average than a pro-Democrat post, and likely the latter will be upvoted way more.
Fortunately nobody has written a pro-Harris post for us to directly analyze the counterfactual.
I also disagree that this post seems genuine. The author is clearly well informed and yet has left out the most glaring red flags of another Trump presidency, instead painting a picture of what a typical rational actor at the head of a democractic goverment might do. This feels misinformed at best and misleading at worst.
I think it’s a mistake to try to predict Donald Trump’s behavior in a second term based on any previous policy-specific statements or actions as he has clearly demonstrated his propensity to lie and say anything in order to gain power. If elected, Trump will consolidate power (as he already has to an alarming extent) and will no longer need to satisfy constituents (other than the ultra-rich). He will see AI as just another tool he can wield to gain and maintain his own power. Would you have wanted Hitler to have gotten the atomic bomb first if he had pledged to regulate nuclear power?