I disagree; incentives matter, and when one earns more by promoting harmful behaviors, that's what many will do. They mention the example of Snapstreak, which is designed to keep you plugged in; that's not a symptom of technology, but a symptom of the economic model of the group of people developing it.
True, but it doesn't necessarily mean that the incentives are a bad thing. The incentives do promote activity in the "green tech" space, much of which is waste, or even fraud, but maybe some of it will turn out to be useful.
It would be great if the structure of the incentives could be adjusted to reduce waste and fraud, but accepting that there will be some level of abuse may be the price of encouraging progress.
The claim is that it does change behavior, but only temporarily and it doesn't change the culture in a positive way / doesn't motivate people. It ends up feeling like a way of manipulating. That being said, according to this article, the entire incentive system would need to be dismantled. Simply adding more incentives wouldn't necessarily produce higher quality, at least not in the long run. So essentially the process of incentivizing new amazing research for funding is the primary issue and adding incentives for pointing out issues would just be a bandaid.
This is not a question of whether some specific person is a bad person. It's a question of whether the current incentive scheme leads to certain aggregate behavior.
Citation? I believe this is a pretty active and contested area of research, so I'm a little skeptical of the problematic behaviors that you claim are incentivized.
It's better to realign the incentives to make sure you don't end up in pathological scenarios. The reason why tech companies find investing in this so lucrative is because these markets have so much winner-takes-all scenarios. You don't need to strawman it - governments are dealing with these kinds of secnarios, it's not ideal but better than doing nothing.
Wow, when I hear about perverse incentives, I don't usually think about people spending their lives showing their clients a taste of a possible future until a high enough reward gets them to stop caring. Reward hacking for humans.
In the context of the video, which focused on technical details, I personally don't think the symbolic or incentive value is relevant. I'm glad you raised the point though.
reply