That’s why I’ve started giving out heroin for free in school yards.

Children are smaller making it more cost effective to get them high, and while still increasing net happiness.

Imagine constant stupefying euphoria with no object … some of us need not imagine.

NEVERTHELESS I read that bit as saying build rat park for your pet rats, and maintain rat park in perpetuity. No mention of wires, right? Even still, euthanasia at a concrete date, with no thought of the fact that rats might be looking forward to watching their grandchildren scurry, coming to terms with the passing of time. Rats live in complex loving societies! … rats should only be euthanized upon their specific request.

I sometimes think that rationalists just really like having counterintuitive conclusions like this, and the only reason they’re into utilitarianism is because it lets them justify it.

I can never tell whether they’re trying to make ad absurdam arguments against utilitarianism or whether they unironically believe it, but then I remember… Rationalism.

If we did this with the Rationalists maybe they’d stop trying to make phrenology a thing again?

I can’t wait till these dumbasses finally put two and two together, applying their own paperclip-maximizer thought experiment to their ideal FAI “utilon”-maximizer…

The closest thing we can make to universal eudaimonia with current technology is a farm of many small animals that are made as happy as possible.

But…like why though? What’s the point of that?

I am not aware of any public discussion on this subject

I am not aware of any discussion on how I should light old shoes on fire instead of properly disposing of them. Curious. I wonder why that might be.

Suppose the rats are euthanized when their health starts to deteriorate, so they get close to 1 QALY per year. This would cost about per rat per month plus an opportunity cost of maybe 00 per month for the time spent, which works out to another per rat per month. Thus creating 1 rat QALY costs 20 per year, which is 40 per human QALY per year.

You missed the part where you explain what the ever loving point of all of this is. It sounds like you’re on a mission to generate happy chemicals in animals like it’s some sort of religious quest.

Humane Insecticides

I know very little about humane insecticides but it’s a cause that’s plausibly highly cost-effective

I don’t think you should be in charge of money.

High-Leverage Values Spreading

Trying to convince rich people to donate their billions to make happy rats and smiling-but-dead mosquitos is a waste of time. It’s weird how people say “don’t put all your eggs in one basket” but will pray that the rich people ( who are quasi deities to some, in a way ) will kindly increase their pay to a livable wage if they bootlick enough. Please mr elon donate to my kickstarter. You know these people have, like, secretaries and whatever to weed out all your dumb requests, right?

Promoting Universal Eudaimonia

I get this feeling you saw The Matrix when you were younger and took away all kinds of stupid conclusions. You know what you people need? We need synthetic brains so you guys can wire it up to generate happy. Because generating the happy chemical seems to be all y’all care about.

Someone once said that it’s fun to not be in power. When your ideology isn’t in power, you can craft all manner of scenarios in which it would help the world. In a way, some people never want to be in power but will always dream of it. Because never actually being in power means they can forever dream and don’t have to make policies that it turns out suck. They can live in their bubble and never be challenged by the realities of what they want to do.

Maybe the best way to do this is to start a Pay David Pearce to Do Whatever He Wants Fund, but I don’t know if David Pearce is funding constrained.

Eww a bootlicker.

He even made a rap music video about it.

I wonder what Peter Singer would say about this. He has to say this is a great idea, right?

How about you guys provide an actual argument against this?