7 ms·

The truly rational (and ethical) way to get a vaccine early would have been to volunteer in an early-stage trial. You'd even get paid! The risk would be lower,

The truly rational (and ethical) way to get a vaccine early would have been to volunteer in an early-stage trial. You'd even get paid! The risk would be lower, and the likely efficacy would be higher, because even an unproven candidate is more likely to work than something you cooked up in your kitchen. In some early stages there isn't even the risk that you would be in the placebo arm. And of course there's the extra benefit that you would be helping the wider community, though I'm not sure how important that is to true Rationalists.

tim333 6y ago
I don't think it was that easy to get in. There are usually only a few thousand in early stage trials and millions who would be up for it.
- ascorbic 6y ago
  Have you tried? There were still single-arm, paid stage 2 trials recruiting in the UK in December (I can't remember which vaccine). I would've signed-up, but I'm already on the (placebo-controlled, unpaid) J&J stage 3 trial so can't take part in another. A stage 2/3 trial is still more likely to be effective than the homebrew approach, even after accounting for the 50% chance you've been given a placebo. As for how I got onto the stage 3 trial: I signed up here in the summer, and they contacted me in November: https://www.nhs.uk/sign-up-to-be-contacted-for-research https://www.nhs.uk/sign-up-to-be-contacted-for-research
  - tim333 6y ago
    Sort of but not really. I'm an odd case as I had covid in April. I put my name with the NHS anyway in case they still want to try stuff on us survivors.
    - pell 6y ago
      How's your health been since the infection if you don't mind the question?
      - tim333 6y ago
        I've been fine. I was one of the lucky ones who was almost asymptomatic.
- Symmetry 6y ago
  They want a diversity of ages and races in vaccine trials. There's a lot more competition in some categories than others.
1996 6y ago
> And of course there's the extra benefit that you would be helping the wider community, though I'm not sure how important that is to true Rationalists. Actually, that's a net negative for me: whatever benefits the community may create some warm happy feelings (kumbaya!) that may reduce the correctness of my decision.
- ascorbic 6y ago
  Why would feeling happy reduce the correctness of the decision? Isn't happiness the only utility that matters?
  - 1996 6y ago
    Many reasons - mostly that it makes you incorrectly discount the negatives, incorrectly assert some possibility, neglect some second or third order consequences etc. Check out what I think is called the depression correctness hypothesis (at least IIRC): clinically depressed people cast more accurate judgements and evaluations. I want to use the full power of that by taking decision that have the potential to increase my future utility (or the sum of its present value) in the most clear minded way possible, so with as little warm fuzzy feelings as possible
    - notahacker 6y ago
      But even if you are a unique human whose utility is entirely unrelated to the sum of warm fuzzy feelings they feel, arbitrarily avoiding stuff which makes you happy is an irrational cognitive bias which will often if not even usually (since warm fuzzy feelings evolved from preference for certain types of collaboration improving survival odds) lead to worse material outcomes. The Depression Correctness Hypothesis experiments, incidentally, said nothing about depressed people's ability to achieve better outcomes; they simply concluded that in experiments where humans were asked to estimate their level of control over the outcome, depressed people were more likely to correctly reason they didn't have [much] control. cf predictions for future utility in studies of cooperative behaviour, reciprocal altruism etc...

tim333 6y ago

I don't think it was that easy to get in. There are usually only a few thousand in early stage trials and millions who would be up for it.

ascorbic 6y ago
Have you tried? There were still single-arm, paid stage 2 trials recruiting in the UK in December (I can't remember which vaccine). I would've signed-up, but I'm already on the (placebo-controlled, unpaid) J&J stage 3 trial so can't take part in another. A stage 2/3 trial is still more likely to be effective than the homebrew approach, even after accounting for the 50% chance you've been given a placebo. As for how I got onto the stage 3 trial: I signed up here in the summer, and they contacted me in November: https://www.nhs.uk/sign-up-to-be-contacted-for-research https://www.nhs.uk/sign-up-to-be-contacted-for-research
- tim333 6y ago
  Sort of but not really. I'm an odd case as I had covid in April. I put my name with the NHS anyway in case they still want to try stuff on us survivors.
  - pell 6y ago
    How's your health been since the infection if you don't mind the question?
    - tim333 6y ago
      I've been fine. I was one of the lucky ones who was almost asymptomatic.
Symmetry 6y ago
They want a diversity of ages and races in vaccine trials. There's a lot more competition in some categories than others.

1996 6y ago

> And of course there's the extra benefit that you would be helping the wider community, though I'm not sure how important that is to true Rationalists. Actually, that's a net negative for me: whatever benefits the community may create some warm happy feelings (kumbaya!) that may reduce the correctness of my decision.

ascorbic 6y ago
Why would feeling happy reduce the correctness of the decision? Isn't happiness the only utility that matters?
- 1996 6y ago
  Many reasons - mostly that it makes you incorrectly discount the negatives, incorrectly assert some possibility, neglect some second or third order consequences etc. Check out what I think is called the depression correctness hypothesis (at least IIRC): clinically depressed people cast more accurate judgements and evaluations. I want to use the full power of that by taking decision that have the potential to increase my future utility (or the sum of its present value) in the most clear minded way possible, so with as little warm fuzzy feelings as possible
  - notahacker 6y ago
    But even if you are a unique human whose utility is entirely unrelated to the sum of warm fuzzy feelings they feel, arbitrarily avoiding stuff which makes you happy is an irrational cognitive bias which will often if not even usually (since warm fuzzy feelings evolved from preference for certain types of collaboration improving survival odds) lead to worse material outcomes. The Depression Correctness Hypothesis experiments, incidentally, said nothing about depressed people's ability to achieve better outcomes; they simply concluded that in experiments where humans were asked to estimate their level of control over the outcome, depressed people were more likely to correctly reason they didn't have [much] control. cf predictions for future utility in studies of cooperative behaviour, reciprocal altruism etc...