111–120 of 200 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not an asset. It doesn't provide value or a return.
It is an asset, unless you consider gold etc. to not be assets either?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a bit behind on the times, but I'm failing to see how the philosophy of effective altruism and cryptocurrency are related. Do you know how the two got intertwined?
My (outsider's) understanding is that the "longtermist" sub-school of EA has grown over the years, and has developed increasingly convoluted and speculative rationales for behavior that would otherwise be considered unethical. The example I'm most familiar with is calculating utils in terms of the expected total human population of the galaxy, were we to achieve interstellar travel: it's not inconceivable that orders…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My (outsider's) understanding is that the "longtermist" sub-school of EA has grown over the years, and has developed increasingly convoluted and speculative rationales for behavior that would otherwise be considered unethical. The example I'm most familiar with is calculating utils in terms of the expected total human population of the galaxy, were we to achieve interstellar travel: it's not inconceivable that orders…
Galactic utility is ridiculous. But so is the other extreme, to act only on short-term utility. The asymmetry is that most humans don't need any encouragement to think short-term, but they do need some impetus to think long-term. But it takes wisdom to balance the two concerns. And yes it is a huge downside to any strategy that delays gratification that it can be "hacked" for evil, which is a problem more general tha…
Maybe someone more familiar with the EA movement can answer this: why has rule utilitarianism disappeared from EA rationales for behavior? That seems to me a very natural check on these otherwise extreme (long and short-term) leaps of reasoning.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I keep seeing these headlines, and I keep really trying to feel sorry for these people that are potentially loosing their arses. However, I just can't get there. NFTs are the ones I'm really LOLing about vs the currency plays, but since the currencies are failing too, it just kind reveals the house of straw the whole thing truly is.
Empathy for people worse off than you, even for people who you think make bad decisions, is not hard. Think of someone you care for unconditionally, maybe your child, and imagine that person suffering through this because of poor decision. Would you castigate him or try to soothe him?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many of us have been warning people for years that this would be the outcome. We were ridiculed for it.
Nobody was ridiculed for advising people to keep their coins in their own wallet. You were probably ridiculed for saying crypto is a ponzi. But Bitcoin's and Ethereum's prices are consistently higher now than they were 2 years ago. What's the bad outcome you've been warning about that actually happens?
I do not think crypto itself is a ponzi - I think long term it has uses, but not this stupid "get rich quick" bs.
But I was laughed at for saying "don't buy crypto to make money". NFTs can genuinely be useful - but if you're using them with the goal of making money then you're using them wrong. This stupid art stuff and other general stupid "get rich schemes" have obfuscated it's actual usefulness, leaving it overvalued as all heck, and everyone scammed.
The very volatile price caused by this stupid "get rich quick" hype makes it even more difficult to actually use it.
The bad outcome I was warning about was the 80%+ drop. Even advising people to keep coins in their own wallet is commonly dismissed with "yeah but [exchange] does x differently and is too big to fail".
Does anyone know how Coinbase avoided this fate? I really thought it would be them to fall, but they proved everyone wrong. There’s some key difference between Coinbase and an exchange like FTX. Is it because FTX had a token, and then leveraged themselves using their own token? Binance has a token too. Are they in similar danger? It would be an interesting contrast to know why one exchange is safe vs another. Here’s…
I'm curious about why was he buying out all those other failing crypto firms? Did he not understand his own situation? Was it binance's triggering via the sale of ftx that triggered customers pulling their money out? Who knows about binance now. Any external investments they had went down in value, their crypto holdings went down. There's not particular reason to worry about binance. I've never bought into these inexplainable crypto giants anyway. How many more are left to fail?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a bit behind on the times, but I'm failing to see how the philosophy of effective altruism and cryptocurrency are related. Do you know how the two got intertwined?
My (outsider's) understanding is that the "longtermist" sub-school of EA has grown over the years, and has developed increasingly convoluted and speculative rationales for behavior that would otherwise be considered unethical. The example I'm most familiar with is calculating utils in terms of the expected total human population of the galaxy, were we to achieve interstellar travel: it's not inconceivable that orders…
It sounds ridiculous to you because you framed it in an uncharitable way. Another way of saying "maximize the likelihood of a galaxy filled with colonized planets", so far as contemporary people are concerned, is "minimize the likelihood of civilizational collapse". Even a marginal reduction in the risk of nuclear war, for instance, would be a very good thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My (outsider's) understanding is that the "longtermist" sub-school of EA has grown over the years, and has developed increasingly convoluted and speculative rationales for behavior that would otherwise be considered unethical. The example I'm most familiar with is calculating utils in terms of the expected total human population of the galaxy, were we to achieve interstellar travel: it's not inconceivable that orders…
This is called “the end justifies the means” and EA did not invent it, unfortunately.
I would understand it more if it was purely hedonic: at least I could then argue about whether the ends actually do justify the means! But instead it's this sort of unfalsifiable, "but what if" reasoning that's actively diverting money away from worthwhile causes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a bit behind on the times, but I'm failing to see how the philosophy of effective altruism and cryptocurrency are related. Do you know how the two got intertwined?
My (outsider's) understanding is that the "longtermist" sub-school of EA has grown over the years, and has developed increasingly convoluted and speculative rationales for behavior that would otherwise be considered unethical. The example I'm most familiar with is calculating utils in terms of the expected total human population of the galaxy, were we to achieve interstellar travel: it's not inconceivable that orders…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My (outsider's) understanding is that the "longtermist" sub-school of EA has grown over the years, and has developed increasingly convoluted and speculative rationales for behavior that would otherwise be considered unethical. The example I'm most familiar with is calculating utils in terms of the expected total human population of the galaxy, were we to achieve interstellar travel: it's not inconceivable that orders…
> Consequently, we should divert money away from the welfare of people living today and towards efforts that maximize the likelihood of a galaxy filled with colonized planets. If that sounds ridiculous, it's because it is. It sounds ridiculous to you because you framed it in an uncharitable way. Another way of saying "maximize the likelihood of a galaxy filled with colonized planets", so far as contemporary people ar…