I’m not quite sure in matters of morality competition should serve as its basis. It’s too easy to game such things, e.g. the aforementioned optimized “hyper-ethics” of EA or buying indulgences etc. It’s too easy to see oneself as blameless based on some particular slice of life, to become a monster whilst thinking oneself morally as above all others (dictators care deeply about being seen as righteous, why do they all spend so much time on propaganda). Better to admit that everyone, including oneself, sins, and also that everyone is worthy of redemption, and to follow from that.
The motivating factor for doing right should never be that it bases oneself above someone else in any way; a better way, imo, is that moral behavior is more in accord with a sincere, unillusioned engagement with life that is aware of the interdependence of all things, the fluid boundaries of what constitutes the self and hence self-interest.
Rutger Bregman admits that he’s not sure what AGI actually is beyond vague utopian visions, but trivial questions aside, he’s sure it will revolutionize the world in 10 years.
For those who haven’t heard of him, he’s a Dutch historian who achieved some fame for his book arguing for UBI and reduced work weeks, as well as his critique of rich people avoiding taxes and a segment on Tucker Carlson’s show where he openly challenged his politics. He has since seemingly turned 180 degrees and become a billionaire-backed effective altruist.
Rutger Bregman admits he’s not quite sure what AGI actually is beyond vague utopian visions, but trivial questions aside, he’s certain it’ll revolutionize the world in 10 years.
Let it never be claimed again that economics isn’t a real discipline; it may turn out to be as real as the basilisk.