What would "stalling the film" look like? And how would you avoid drawing more attention to the film by doing so?

I'm sorry if I came off too harsh with my comment, if you were referring to me. How could I have phrased my points better?

Just to clarify, by "Sam" do you mean Altman or Bankman-Fried?

Threatening and banning critical pieces isn't what good people do; it's what groups like the Church of Scientology do. The goal isn't to censor criticism, but to create a positive counter-narrative. Or more realistically, a populist narrative with "Big Tech" as the antagonist.

a. Probably Canada or Australia/NZ.

b. Lack of ability to do good in authoritarian/anti-science (in particular related to vaccinations and medicine) regimes is the first factor. The second factor is questioning/fluctuating gender identity, which may cause me to be targeted.

Additional Notes: I think I started making serious efforts around June 2024, but I thought the authoritarianism would be seriously limited, so for the sake of my mental health, I decided not to transfer colleges. So far, it seems like most tell-tale signs of authoritarianism (threats to invade countries, kidnappings off the streets) have come to pass. So I am now trying to move again, hopefully by this winter or spring.

I'd like to make a post about gruntworkers, people who do low-expertise but essential and non-replacable work. For example, an unpaid volunteer position, that requires general skills like planning, fundraising, outreach, etc.

How political groups aren't "causes", but networks of trust with different causes inside them.

False dichotomies and tradeoffs and their relevance to cause area reasoning.

Why many altruistic causes with different theories spiral into pessimism.

Both could be somewhat correct.

The true reading could be: "Utilitarianism is flawed because false dichotomies are often used to justify unnecessary suffering."

Not that I completely agree with that reading.

I'm confused. Shouldn't the citation say 2025 instead of 2026?

Is this only for people in the UK, or should people from other countries fill it out too?

Edit: I saw the deadline passed already. Still, this question may be relevant to other posts.

This is an interesting idea. One unstated assumption I don't agree with is the assumption that Boltzmann brains would experience more negative experiences than positive ones. In order to justify destroying the possibility of something existing, one would need to prove it would experience negative experiences that outweigh the positive experiences. Human brains experience pain more intensely than pleasure because they are adapted for an environment which harshly punishes mistakes. Boltzmann brains would form randomly, so their pleasure to pain balance would be random, thus making it about an even ratio. In that case, we have no idea what the net effect would be.