There’s some literature on why we should basically just use the most pessimistic case for discounting, since it dominates over expected future impact. And that likely means we should do no discounting.
Could you please point me to some? Thanks!
There’s some arguments in favor and against time discounting linked from here (and more scholarly sources linked from those links): https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/topics/temporal-discounting
I’ve never personally looked into discount rates in any depth, and see the entire topic as rather beside the point; Scott Alexander best explains why: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/KDjEogAqWNTdddF9g/long-termism-vs-existential-risk
Current theme: default
Less Wrong (text)
Less Wrong (link)
Arrow keys: Next/previous image
Escape or click: Hide zoomed image
Space bar: Reset image size & position
Scroll to zoom in/out
(When zoomed in, drag to pan; double-click to close)
Keys shown in yellow (e.g., ]) are accesskeys, and require a browser-specific modifier key (or keys).
]
Keys shown in grey (e.g., ?) do not require any modifier keys.
?
Esc
h
f
a
m
v
c
r
q
t
u
o
,
.
/
s
n
e
;
Enter
[
\
k
i
l
=
-
0
′
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
→
↓
←
↑
Space
x
z
`
g
There’s some literature on why we should basically just use the most pessimistic case for discounting, since it dominates over expected future impact. And that likely means we should do no discounting.
Could you please point me to some? Thanks!
There’s some arguments in favor and against time discounting linked from here (and more scholarly sources linked from those links): https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/topics/temporal-discounting
I’ve never personally looked into discount rates in any depth, and see the entire topic as rather beside the point; Scott Alexander best explains why: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/KDjEogAqWNTdddF9g/long-termism-vs-existential-risk