What are the best examples of significant harm caused by "infohazards"? (don't say Roko)
I tend to internally roll my eyes when I hear this concern, often from EA-land, and I'd like to inoculate myself against that if appropriate.
Conversation
Replying to
Many quite good examples in the replies, on both a personal scale (oppt'y costs, shallow pond, non-self) and a population scale (bioweapons, Szilard and vicinity, etc). Thank you, Twitter! I feel less eye-roll-y about this topic now.
1
26
Replying to
they tell me atheists are unhappier than believers, but I don't buy it :D
if true, that could be an example
2
5
Even if true causality could very well go the other way
5
Replying to
"The gods of the Disc have never bothered much about judging the … dead, and so people only go to hell if that’s where they believe … that they deserve to go. Which they won’t do if they don’t know about it. This explains why it is so important to shoot missionaries on sight."
6
Replying to
Does, say, Marxism count as an infohazard and the ensuing revolutions significant harm?
1
1
5
It's a reasonable point, but just to define my jargon here, I'm referring to "infohazard" as Bostrom coined it—a risk arising from the spread of *true* information.
3
1
6
Show replies
Replying to
I think it depends a lot what “information” and “hazard” mean. A few logical thought experiments can shatter the idea that individuality is real, which can destroy some people (eg Heidegger). Molecules are information too, and they can do the same. People who do high-dose..
3
7
Thinking in terms of Bostrom's def'n—i.e. true information which harms the listener. Those both qualify, though I notice my eyes do still roll a bit. I guess it's because the propensity for hazard remains quite low (assuming true information about molecular risk is offered).
3
6
Show replies