I donât understand the meaning of this post/âexcerpt. It reads like a critique, but I canât tell what Ben wants to change or how he wants to change it, as the Republic summary has no clear bearing on the actions of any EA organization Iâm aware of.
Also, if I werenât someone with a lot of context on who Ben is, this would be even more confusing (in my case, I can at least link his concerns here to other things I know heâs written).
I recommend that people creating linkposts include a brief summary of what they took away from what theyâve linked to (or an actual abstract if youâve linked to a scientific paper).
It can also be helpful to include information about the author if they donât have a position that makes their expertise obvious. Even if someone doesnât have a relevant background, just knowing about things theyâve written before can help; for example, you might note that Ben has been writing about EA for a while, partly from a perspective of being critical about issues X and Y.
On the plus side, I like the way you always include archive.org links! Itâs important to avoid reference rot, and youâre the only poster I know of who takes this clearly positive step toward doing so.
It reads like a critique, but I canât tell what Ben wants to change or how he wants to change it, as the Republic summary has no clear bearing on the actions of any EA organization Iâm aware of.
Iâm not sure what Ben wants to change (or if he even has policy recommendations).
I think the Republic parallel is interesting. âFigure out how the entire system should be ordered, then align your own life such that it accords with that orderingâ is a plausible algorithm for doing ethics, but itâs not clear that it dominates alternative algorithms.
I appreciated the parallel because I hadnât made the connection before, and I think something like this algorithm is operating latently underneath a lot of EA reasoning.
I donât understand the meaning of this post/âexcerpt. It reads like a critique, but I canât tell what Ben wants to change or how he wants to change it, as the Republic summary has no clear bearing on the actions of any EA organization Iâm aware of.
Also, if I werenât someone with a lot of context on who Ben is, this would be even more confusing (in my case, I can at least link his concerns here to other things I know heâs written).
I recommend that people creating linkposts include a brief summary of what they took away from what theyâve linked to (or an actual abstract if youâve linked to a scientific paper).
It can also be helpful to include information about the author if they donât have a position that makes their expertise obvious. Even if someone doesnât have a relevant background, just knowing about things theyâve written before can help; for example, you might note that Ben has been writing about EA for a while, partly from a perspective of being critical about issues X and Y.
On the plus side, I like the way you always include archive.org links! Itâs important to avoid reference rot, and youâre the only poster I know of who takes this clearly positive step toward doing so.
Iâm not sure what Ben wants to change (or if he even has policy recommendations).
I think the Republic parallel is interesting. âFigure out how the entire system should be ordered, then align your own life such that it accords with that orderingâ is a plausible algorithm for doing ethics, but itâs not clear that it dominates alternative algorithms.
I appreciated the parallel because I hadnât made the connection before, and I think something like this algorithm is operating latently underneath a lot of EA reasoning.