3 ms·
I've also just learned this recently. See "Meditations on Moloch" for the original essay. It explains so much but it's also very depressing -- it's hard to imag
by svachalek 3y ago
I've also just learned this recently. See "Meditations on Moloch" for the original essay. It explains so much but it's also very depressing -- it's hard to imagine how any ordinary person has a prayer of changing the system when so many elements of it are primed to both produce terrible outcomes and to resist change.
It's possible that you could design a new system of government deliberately designed to counter some of these natural tendencies, to change the rules of the game to reward beneficial outcomes better than selfish ones. But I don't know you'd ever get such a thing in place when the people who can make that kind of change are the ones with the most to lose.
- Smoosh 3y agoIt is interesting that the Great Filter Theory usually concerns itself with issues such as nuclear weapons, or disease, but not the failure to overcome greed and self-interest, which, let's face it, is how the modern world is structured.
- nostrademons 3y agoI'm pretty sure SlateStarCodex coined the term, in reference to game theory. It's originally from an Alan Ginsberg poem, and I've never seen it anywhere else in game theory literature. The game-theoretical term is a "Nash equilibrium", which is the state that reality ends up in if every participant follows their own incentives (i.e. no participant can improve their individual outcome by altering their decisions). It is possible - even very common in many real-life games - to end up with a negative Nash equilibrium. The classic example is the Prisoner's Dilemma, where the globally-optimal solution is for neither player to defect, but each individual improves their own outcome by defecting, and so what actually happens is that both suspects confess. It's also possible to achieve a positive Nash equilibrium out of morally-abhorrent individual choices. Mutually-assured destruction is a good example. The game is setup so that if either superpower launches their missiles, humanity ends. Therefore, both superpowers have an incentive to avoid nuclear war, and we're still here.
- stvltvs 3y agoInteresting read so far. Some examples rely on overly idealized or simplified assumptions but they still illustrate how isolated individuals and groups are powerless to resist the race to the bottom. https://www.slatestarcodexabridged.com/Meditations-On-Moloch https://www.slatestarcodexabridged.com/Meditations-On-Moloch