History nerd, reader, writer. Main worries: Extreme poverty, X-risk, metaphorical X-risk in the form of a war that is not an existential risk to humanity as a whole but still kills me and everyone I know and possibly destroys civilization as we know it.
Not a vegetarian, but would like to do a serious long-term analysis of costs and benefits at some point, so if you have any really really good arguments for it that are not incompatible with a total-sum utilitarian the-repugnant-conclusion-is-not-all-that-repugnant perspective, I’m happy to hear them.
I’m sorry, but I really felt this was too preachy for me. I don’t expect this will apply to everyone else, but my response was to flinch away from the work, rather than enjoy or embrace it. It felt… I don’t know. Trying to examine my feelings, I think it was that it felt like propaganda, not art? I know the point of this is to persuade more than to entertain, but this work of art also felt as if it was more to persuade than to explain; it triggered defense reactions that neither the overt (“Inflation”) nor the more narrative (“The Reset Button”) high-rated submissions did; my defense reactions against political ads and internet memes, which usually do not apply to narrative, did in this case, and I would probably put down an EA pamphlet without further reading if I saw this entry in it.
I really am sorry, and you should weight all the positive comments more than this negative one. But my reaction was negative, and I can explain why, but not how to fix it.