I would prefer to live longer at a lower utility, I don't think utility can capture benefit to an individual over time and experience because it relates to slightly different people (a person at different points of time). Another point for me are future risks, if you're maximizing utility at a moment in time you're increasing instability of the system by exploiting more resources, changing the environment and creating more agents.
Why does standard population ethics ignore time? Without knowing the full expected experience (or preferably a distribution of expected differences) of a person and the whole society across time these comparisons aren't really valuable to me.
Not hating on you personally, I understand it's an intro. And there are probably people who thought about these things, what I don't like is that nuance is not emphasized in TESCREAL circles, so wherever there's more discussion it's not super accessible to me. The focus in the movement is more on applying their calculations to cases further and further removed from the initial intuition, like proposing to butcher wild animals because they don't live cushy lives like we do or simulating gazillions of post-humans (more like slop-humans).
Also, these chatbots would butcher you in a millisecond if they thought there was a USB with an ExploitBench key inside of you. I do not recommend using them as ethics tutors.
I would prefer to live longer at a lower utility, I don't think utility can capture benefit to an individual over time and experience because it relates to slightly different people (a person at different points of time). Another point for me are future risks, if you're maximizing utility at a moment in time you're increasing instability of the system by exploiting more resources, changing the environment and creating more agents.
Why does standard population ethics ignore time? Without knowing the full expected experience (or preferably a distribution of expected differences) of a person and the whole society across time these comparisons aren't really valuable to me.
Not hating on you personally, I understand it's an intro. And there are probably people who thought about these things, what I don't like is that nuance is not emphasized in TESCREAL circles, so wherever there's more discussion it's not super accessible to me. The focus in the movement is more on applying their calculations to cases further and further removed from the initial intuition, like proposing to butcher wild animals because they don't live cushy lives like we do or simulating gazillions of post-humans (more like slop-humans).
Also, these chatbots would butcher you in a millisecond if they thought there was a USB with an ExploitBench key inside of you. I do not recommend using them as ethics tutors.