[EarthAmbassador]

How does one research and generate insights for what does not exist yet? Is there a framework? At SXSW this year, there were a couple of talks about forecasting, as a tool for futurism, but where ethics are concerned, I’ve not seen a good template. Maybe all if this is obvious, yet I’m curious so I’m asking.

[skeeter2020]

I'm not expert and struggled to read Bostrom's Super Intelligence, but my interpretation was it started with a lot of broad, hand-wavy factors & historical interpetations, layered on some pretty tenious projections as inevitable and wanked off with deep thought experiments. I get this sort of open-ended exploration has value, but I'm not sold on it's "prioritized value" when compared with other areas and directions.

[karma_pharmer]

I just finished reading it.

It's extremely repetitive; he could have written a book one-third of its length without leaving anything out. There's some good stuff in there, but I was sort of annoyed that the author forces you to read everything three times. Kinda disrespectful to his readers' available free time.

[christkv]

It was literally under the department of intellectual wankery. Them shutting it down is the pot calling the kettle….

[mitthrowaway2]

> How does one research and generate insights for what does not exist yet?

It's Zeno's paradox of research: we cannot think about what does not already exist, therefore nothing new can ever be brought into existence!

[pfdietz]

I call this "nothing can ever happen for the first time". One often hears it in passive-aggressive arguments against renewable energy.