Reader · no content
No body text on file.
Open the original to read the full piece.
It's nice of you to worry about me, but I really do have a life
Brief
Viliam’s LessWrong post (2026-05-04) argues that many people publicly misrepresent their priorities because workplace and hiring norms reward appearing utterly devoted to work; he invokes 'preference falsification' and rejects 'revealed preferences' arguments used to attack UBI and pro‑leisure choices. He says he would accept a perpetual UBI and spend his time with family, hobbies, volunteering and projects, framing the outcome as a consequential 50:50 experiment worth taking rather than enduring guaranteed wasted time. In comments, habryka supplies concrete quotes from Paul Christiano, Sam Marks, Joe Carlsmith and exchanges around Eliezer/Buck to show Viliam’s post targets common mischaracterizations about learning from non‑critical failures in AI alignment, while TsviBT highlights a broader 'Consensus vs the Slighted' cultural split that may affect AGI motivations and reasoning about risk.
Why it matters
Viliam (LessWrong, published 2026-05-04) says he values family and hobbies over career ambition, cites 'preference falsification', and would quit his job if given a perpetual UBI — he frames this as a 50:50 bet between flourishing and collapse; post has Karma 38 and 4 comments.
Key details
- He rejects 'revealed preferences' and pro-work arguments that claim jobs are necessary for meaning, calling those positions gaslighting and a form of the just-world fallacy; he argues hiring and workplace cultures incentivize people to lie about devotion to work.
- Commenter habryka (karma 34) responds by linking concrete AI-alignment discussions (Paul Christiano, Sam Marks, Joe Carlsmith, Buck vs Eliezer) about whether one can learn from non-critical failures, saying Viliam's post is a useful rejoinder to straw‑manning in those debates.
- TsviBT (karma 13) proposes a broader 'Consensus vs the Slighted' social divide and suggests healing it could reduce motivations to build AGI and biased reasoning about X-risk; other commenters ask for clarification (Raemon) or post unrelated predictions (leogao).