Less directly, I think caution is good for other interventions, e.g. “Epistemic Security”, “Cognitive bias research”, “Research management and research environments (for example, understanding what made Bell Labs work)”.
I’d also agree that caution is good for many of the listed interventions. To me, that seems to be even more of a case for more prioritization-style research though, which is the main thing I’m arguing for.
I’d also agree that caution is good for many of the listed interventions. To me, that seems to be even more of a case for more prioritization-style research though, which is the main thing I’m arguing for.
Honestly, I think my comment is just focused on “quality control” and preventing harm.
Based on your comments, I think it is possible that I am completely aligned with you.