[djokkataja]

> We already have a test for this. Parrots, octopus, whales and many other creatures are also diverse. But our problems are beyond their experience. Do we value their diversity as thinkers in our economy?

> We don't.

I don't mean humans as they presently are, but humans as somewhat-novel GAI entities after upgrading (and humans as an ongoing source: likely there will be some humans that aren't interested in changing themselves in such ways, but who might change their mind over time and/or have children who see things differently).

> (I am speaking in economic terms. We can deeply intensely highly "value" many things, but if we don't actually invest economic value in protecting or nuturing those things, our appreciation has little or no impact.)

I don't think this is true. For example, suppose you deeply value a bunch of things that you don't think have much economic significance, but economic significance is the most important thing to your perspective / philosophy, so you don't take care of the things that you deeply value. This does have a significant impact: you become sad, you become depressed, you become less economically productive. So then you say, oh, I'll just take care of those other things I care about, and then I can be economically productive! So you make a few changes but then find yourself feeling down again not long afterwards because economic value is the cornerstone of how you think about things. And then you realize that from an economic perspective, it's more beneficial economically to stick with a perspective that embraces your values as you discern them (and how those continue developing over time) rather than sticking with a perspective that puts economic value first. And then you are taking your first steps to freedom from the curse of your Bachelor's in Economics. ;)

Ethical GAIs also seem likely to me ... hopefully.

[Nevermark]

> suppose you deeply value a bunch of things that you don't think have much economic significance, but [...etc...]

We are a mess. We often think some things are worth more than money, but are not motivated to spend money on them when needed.

Everything form climate change, to saving specific species.

I think GAI's (green field, or human uplifts) will be much more coherent. They won't be settling for a beautiful wonderful Goldberg brain, designed by a series of a million fortunate accidents, like we have to.