jasoncrawford

An­nounc­ing the 2024 Roots of Progress Blog-Build­ing Intensive

Fea­ture on the progress move­ment in Rea­son Magazine

What is progress?

• jasoncrawford 27 Feb 2024 14:25 UTC

  2 points

  in reply to: Daniel Paleka’s comment on: Daniel Paleka’s Shortform

  Tyler Cowen did something like this for covid: https://​​marginalrevolution.com/​​marginalrevolution/​​2020/​​03/​​1-million-plus-in-emergent-ventures-prizes-for-coronavirus-work.html

Why you, per­son­ally, should want a larger hu­man population

Event, Feb 29: “Towards a New Philos­o­phy of Progress” in Bos­ton and on Zoom

Speak­ing: Fore­sight, In­sti­tuto Mille­nium, CS Monitor

Mak­ing ev­ery re­searcher seek grants is a bro­ken model

Cel­lu­lar re­pro­gram­ming, pneu­matic launch sys­tems, and ter­raform­ing Mars: Some things I learned about at Fore­sight Vi­sion Weekend

• jasoncrawford 31 Dec 2023 19:03 UTC

  1 point

  in reply to: Christopher Chan’s comment on: Nei­ther EA nor e/​acc is what we need to build the future

  I liked Vitalik’s post and generally agree

The Roots of Progress 2023 in review

Ja­son’s links di­gest, 2023-12-29: Rayleigh’s oil drop ex­per­i­ment and more

• jasoncrawford 19 Dec 2023 14:28 UTC

  1 point

  in reply to: NicholasGruen’s comment on: Ac­cel­er­at­ing sci­ence through evolv­able institutions

  OK, sorry!

• jasoncrawford 18 Dec 2023 17:05 UTC

  1 point

  in reply to: Michael Frank Martin’s comment on: Ac­cel­er­at­ing sci­ence through evolv­able institutions

  Good point, I agree! Something important to creating the right research lab team and culture.

• jasoncrawford 18 Dec 2023 14:43 UTC

  1 point

  in reply to: NicholasGruen’s comment on: Ac­cel­er­at­ing sci­ence through evolv­able institutions

  Hmm, I don’t agree with how you are characterizing my assumptions about human nature. I’m not assuming that scientists are after money or prestige. I assume most of them, or at least the best of them, are motivated by curiosity, the desire to discover and to know, and the value of scientific knowledge for humanity.

  Re accountability, I frankly think we could do with a bit less of it. Accountability is always in tension with research freedom.

  Re people performing for their superiors: I actually think scientists performing for their managers would be a much healthier model than what we have today, which is scientists performing for their grant committees. I have another piece on this that I plan to publish soon.

• jasoncrawford 18 Dec 2023 14:38 UTC

  1 point

  in reply to: Michael Frank Martin’s comment on: Ac­cel­er­at­ing sci­ence through evolv­able institutions

  Curiosity is already a very strong motivator, we just need to enable it and get out of the way. Give scientists funding without making them narrowly constrain their goals, dial down their ambition, or spend half their time writing grants. Then give them the research freedom to pursue that curiosity wherever it leads. It’s not easy but it is pretty simple.

Ja­son’s links di­gest, 2023-12-15: Vi­talik on d/​acc, $100M+ in prizes, and more

Ac­cel­er­at­ing sci­ence through evolv­able institutions

The ori­gins of the steam en­g­ine: An es­say with in­ter­ac­tive an­i­mated diagrams

• jasoncrawford 29 Nov 2023 4:16 UTC

  1 point

  in reply to: Yarrow B.’s comment on: Marc An­dreessen pens “Techno-Op­ti­mist Man­i­festo.” Discuss

  Good question, I don’t know. People have been talking about “progress studies” or the “progress movement” or “progress community”, and others have talked about the “abundance agenda”, but none of those lend themselves to personal labels/​identities…