Thanks for this article! In my view, it’s a really good contribution to the debate, and the issues it raises are under-rated by longtermists.
I do feel uneasy about being given joint credit with Toby Ord for the model (and since this is now public I want to say so publicly). Though I may have made an expository contribution, the model is definitely the work of Ord.
In my undergraduate days of 2017, based on Ord’s unpublished draft, I wrote this article. I think my contributions were:
A more explicit (or, depending on your perspective, plodding and equation-laden) exposition of the Ord model
Longer discussion (around 7,000 words vs Ord’s 3,000)
Some extensions of the model
I now view the extensions as far less useful than the exposition of the core model proposed by Ord; the extensions were not worth mathematising. At the time I had a fondness for them—today I look back upon that as somewhat sophomoric. Indeed, this article uses none of my extensions (at least as of the last time I read a draft). So I don’t think it’s correct to say the model is even in part due to me.
By the way, Ord’s model has now been published as appendix E of The Precipice, but in even more summary form than the unpublished document I looked at in 2017. This shortening might lead someone looking at the published record today to underestimate Ord’s contribution and overestimate mine. My article does credit him for everything that is his, and so is a good source for the genealogy of the idea.
I just wanted to express a perspective that perhaps Tom is being overly modest about his own contributions.
As someone who has read carefully through both Tom and Toby’s work, I can say that I found both Tom and Toby’s work stimulating in a complimentary way, and that I would not have learned as much as I have by reading either aticle alone.
Thanks for this article! In my view, it’s a really good contribution to the debate, and the issues it raises are under-rated by longtermists.
I do feel uneasy about being given joint credit with Toby Ord for the model (and since this is now public I want to say so publicly). Though I may have made an expository contribution, the model is definitely the work of Ord.
In my undergraduate days of 2017, based on Ord’s unpublished draft, I wrote this article. I think my contributions were:
A more explicit (or, depending on your perspective, plodding and equation-laden) exposition of the Ord model
Longer discussion (around 7,000 words vs Ord’s 3,000)
Some extensions of the model
I now view the extensions as far less useful than the exposition of the core model proposed by Ord; the extensions were not worth mathematising. At the time I had a fondness for them—today I look back upon that as somewhat sophomoric. Indeed, this article uses none of my extensions (at least as of the last time I read a draft). So I don’t think it’s correct to say the model is even in part due to me.
By the way, Ord’s model has now been published as appendix E of The Precipice, but in even more summary form than the unpublished document I looked at in 2017. This shortening might lead someone looking at the published record today to underestimate Ord’s contribution and overestimate mine. My article does credit him for everything that is his, and so is a good source for the genealogy of the idea.
Thanks Tom! It’s really good to hear from you.
I just wanted to express a perspective that perhaps Tom is being overly modest about his own contributions.
As someone who has read carefully through both Tom and Toby’s work, I can say that I found both Tom and Toby’s work stimulating in a complimentary way, and that I would not have learned as much as I have by reading either aticle alone.