4 ms·
Ooo, this will be a good one for the ethics panel. How many of those million people could have saved, or ended a life in that time? Its a juicy one.
by Neliquat 9y ago
Ooo, this will be a good one for the ethics panel. How many of those million people could have saved, or ended a life in that time? Its a juicy one.
- zeroer 9y agoI think the argument rests on the fact that on net, people generally do positive things with their time. If the break-even point isn't 1 million people, where is it? 622k? 100 billion? 3^^^3? This is Eliezer Yudkowski's dust speck argument all over again. http://lesswrong.com/lw/kn/torture_vs_dust_specks/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/kn/torture_vs_dust_specks/