I don’t find persuasive your arguments that the following policy suggestion has high impact (or indeed is something to worry about, in comparison with other factors):
“requiring [SIAI] staff to exhibit a high degree of vigilance about the possibility of poisoning the existential risk meme by making claims that people find uncredible”
(Note that both times I qualified the suggestion to contact SIAI (instead of starting a war) with “if you have a reasonable complaint/usable suggestion for improvement”.)
Understood. Here too, we may have legitimate grounds for difference of opinion rooted in the fact that our impressions have emerged from thousands of data points which we don’t have conscious access to.
(Note that both times I qualified the suggestion to contact SIAI with “if you are serious and have a reasonable complaint”.)
Do you feel that I’ve misrepresented you? I’d be happy to qualify my reference to you however you’d like if you deem my doing so suitable.
I don’t find persuasive your arguments that the following policy suggestion has high impact (or indeed is something to worry about, in comparison with other factors):
(Note that both times I qualified the suggestion to contact SIAI (instead of starting a war) with “if you have a reasonable complaint/usable suggestion for improvement”.)
Understood. Here too, we may have legitimate grounds for difference of opinion rooted in the fact that our impressions have emerged from thousands of data points which we don’t have conscious access to.
Do you feel that I’ve misrepresented you? I’d be happy to qualify my reference to you however you’d like if you deem my doing so suitable.