Worked for me a few minutes ago (~ 10:45 EST USA).

I'm wondering if one should not think of this as Bernie Madoff   2.0.

Thanks and I clearly missed the target of your posting. I sidetracked into the issue of how to chose one's one preferred alternative when external constraints might be present that amount to choosing a lower valued immediate return rather than an longer term value.

I am a fan of teaching to fish but also knowing when that can actually be done. The later is clearly very important.

Maybe the question is not the best framing.

Maybe first ask your self just what we might mean by independent? It seems to me in the post you're subtly shifting towards freedom from external constraints, which I don't think is a fundamental aspect of independence.

Perhaps itemize your understanding of what criteria independence entails and then view that through the lens of degrees of freedom as the number or relationships (external constraints of a type) increases. I think developing the skills to navigate that problem space is one of the skills I see children needing to learn as part of becoming independent.

In terms of social coordination do you see rudeness and manners/courtesy as mirror/inverse tools? Is there some asymmetry present between the two in terms of social coordination mechanisms? Or are these really just two sides of the same coin and we can discuss coordination efficacy from either perspective?

If I follow that, another way of thinking about rudeness might be spending social/political capital?

I am tempted to down vote your response but have held off because I'm not able to get a good confirmation or answer to the questions I have. That said, my concerns with the response are:

1. Just because private labs don't have to report to NIH that none, or even many, don't.
2. A quick search seems to suggest multiple federal agencies are involved with lab safety at various levels.
3. It's not clear if your complaint is really more about a particular database (NIH's) that overall reporting of lab accidents Or perhaps put differently, about some consolidation of reporting databases.
4. Your hypothetical starts with the assumption that no reporting of accidents by private labs exists. It is not clear that is true.
5. Your reference to the Gates Foundation seems like it may be arguing from a special case and then attempting to generalize in appropriately.

Additionally it appears the lead off incident in The Intercept's story is not actually a good example:

The needle pierced through both sets of gloves, but the student saw no blood, so she washed her hands, removed her safety equipment, and left the lab without telling anyone what had happened. Four days later, she ran a fever, and her body ached and convulsed in chills.

That is not a problem with reporting requirements (regardless of to which authority) but failing to follow reporting requirements. More regulation does not solve that problem.

Note, none of this is to say improvements are not possible, or perhaps even needed. But starting from an incomplete map sees like a good way to run the ship aground.

How much of AI alignment and safety has been informed at all by economics?

Part of the background to my question relates to the paperclip maximizer story. I could be poorly understanding the problem suggested by that issue (have not read the original) but to me it largely screams economic system failure. 

Wondering if another take might be that for most people life under Ukraine or under Russia rule is largely the same. That would certainly make taking what one hears on TV -- which ever source you're being fed -- as truth and so the views and values what represent the "good guy" side.

While this doesn't change the basic conclusion from the data, does the data provide any data related to:

1. adults also injured in the accidents for the children 5 and under?
2. Age of the driver of the vehicle?