Suppose there are N people and a baseline existential risk r. There’s an intervention that reduces risk by δ×100% (ie., not percentage points).
Outcome with no intervention: rN people die. Outcome with intervention: (1−δ)rN people die.
Difference between outcomes: δrN. So we should be willing to pay up to δr⋅u(N) for the intervention, where u(N) is the dollar value of N lives.
[Extension: account for time periods, with discounting for exogenous risks.]
I think this approach makes more sense than starting by assigning $X to 0.01% risk reductions, and then looking at the cost of available interventions.
What does that even mean in this context? cost =/= value, and empirically longtermist EA has nowhere near the amounts of $s as would be implied by this model.
@Linch, I’m curious if you’ve taken an intermediate microeconomics course. The idea of maximizing utility subject to a budget constraint (ie. constrained maximization) is the core idea, and is literally what EAs are doing. I’ve been thinking for a while now about writing up the basic idea of constrained maximization, and showing how it applies to EAs. Do you think that would be worthwhile?
Suppose there are N people and a baseline existential risk r. There’s an intervention that reduces risk by δ×100% (ie., not percentage points).
Outcome with no intervention: rN people die.
Outcome with intervention: (1−δ)rN people die.
Difference between outcomes: δrN. So we should be willing to pay up to δr⋅u(N) for the intervention, where u(N) is the dollar value of N lives.
[Extension: account for time periods, with discounting for exogenous risks.]
I think this approach makes more sense than starting by assigning $X to 0.01% risk reductions, and then looking at the cost of available interventions.
What does that even mean in this context? cost =/= value, and empirically longtermist EA has nowhere near the amounts of $s as would be implied by this model.
@Linch, I’m curious if you’ve taken an intermediate microeconomics course. The idea of maximizing utility subject to a budget constraint (ie. constrained maximization) is the core idea, and is literally what EAs are doing. I’ve been thinking for a while now about writing up the basic idea of constrained maximization, and showing how it applies to EAs. Do you think that would be worthwhile?
I did in sophomore year of college (Varian’s book I think?), but it was ~10 years ago so I don’t remember much. 😅😅😅. A primer may be helpful, sure.
(That said, I think it would be more worthwhile if you used your model to produce an answer to my question, and then illustrate some implications).
I’d love to read such a post.
Given an intervention of value v, you should be willing to pay for it if the cost c satisfies c≤v (with indifference at equality).
If your budget constraint is binding, then you allocate it across causes so as to maximize utility.