filter: 💡 🐘 🏟 👽🕒🐦 📺 💰


Thanks! Great followups that really got me thinking. It's moreso the latter, but there's also a shot of epistemic humility about defining utility in the first place. I still think that maximizing utility should be the ultimate social goal. I just have skepticism about my own or anyone else's ability to know (at this point) what the objective utility should be defined as. I can narrow down to something like "well-being" but that still isn't perfectly clear what that looks like. To me, the only sensible decision making system for even _defining_ utility, let alone solving for it, relies on a lot of small-scale decision makers*. So yes, I'm a big fan of direct giving, though even then, I consider it a stopgap rather than the ideal. Ideally I wouldn't be earning dividends on underpaid labor and resources from around the world simply due to historical inequities. If we had something resembling globally equal decision-making, my hypothesis is that excess wealth here would naturally flow to the place where collectively defined utility is maximized. But since we are far from there, I do my part to equalize the imbalance. For future generations, it's tougher, but the practical consideration is that one should be maintaining or expanding the decision-making ability present today. Granted it's hard to know what will do that. This discussion is making me curious whether there are any decision-making equity focused charities in EA though. It would seem like the idea of being "effective"and longtermist, could combine to lead others in that movement to pursue less hierarchical decision making systems. Are there any EA anarchists/socialists?