linktr.ee/alexbeyman
Alex Beyman
Karma: 7
How to Defend the Indefensible
I would need an agent for that. I am in the process of sending query letters to agents specializing in the genres I write.
“I’m not exactly sure what the point is though”
Not to fear transhumanism, not to regard ourselves as finished products, but also not to assume that more intelligent/powerful = more moral
”an earth-swallowing sea of maximizer AI nano”
That’s not what the black sea is, but that angle makes sense in retrospect
It was originally two novellas. I combined them, not seeing a point to publishing them separately. Should I separate them?
Not to worry, I’m secure in my talents, as a tradpubbed author of ten years. If by this time I could not write well, I would choose a different pursuit. I appreciate your good intentions but my ego is uninjured and not in need of coddling. It is a hardened mass of scar tissue as a consequence of growing up autistic in a less sensitive time.
This article in fact was originally posted on a monetized platform, which is why it’s in that style you dislike. You certainly have a nose for it. I didn’t know to tailor it to this community’s preferences as I have only just begun posting here and as yet I’m unfamiliar with those preferences.
I will take your feedback into account. Failure is nothing but a lesson, and a typical outcome of any first attempt at something, in a new environment. Subsequent posts will be more refined, and tailored to this audience, as I get to know it better.
Enjoyable, digestible writing style and thought provoking. Aligns pretty closely with some of my own ideas concerning technological resurrection.
>”Perhaps AIs would treat humans like humans currently treat wildlife and insects, and we will live mostly separate lives, with the AI polluting our habitat and occasionally demolishing a city to make room for its infrastructure, etc.”
Planetary surfaces are actually not a great habitat for AI. Earth in particular has a lot of moisture, weather, ice, mud, etc. that poses challenges for mechanical self replication. The asteroid belt is much more ideal. I hope this will mean AI and human habitats won’t overlap, and that AI would not want the Earth’s minerals simply because the same minerals are available without the difficulty of entering/exiting powerful gravity wells.
Bad according to whose priorities, though? Ours, or the AI’s? That was more the point of this article, whether our interests or the AI’s ought to take precedence, and whether we’re being objective in deciding that.
Rarely do I get such insightful feedback but I appreciate when I do. It’s so hard to step outside of myself, I really value the opportunity to see my thoughts reflected back at me through other lenses than the one I see the world through. I suppose I imagined the obsolete tech would leave little doubt that the Sidekicks aren’t sentient, but the story also sort of makes the opposite case throughout when it talks about how personality is built up by external influences. I want the reader to be undecided by the end and it seems I can’t have that cake and eat it too (have the protag be the good guy). Thanks again and Merry Christmas
This is a prologue of sorts. It takes place in the same world as The Shape of Things to Come, The Three Cardinal Sins, and Perfect Enemy (Recently uploaded at the time of writing) with The Answer serving as the epilogue.
Nooo >:0 The ending has to be bleak, what have you done
I appreciate your readership and insights. Some of these challenges have answers, some were just oversights on my part.
1. The central theme was about having the courage to reject an all powerful authority on moral grounds even if it means eternal torment, rather than endlessly rationalize and defend its wrongdoing out of fear. “Are you a totalitarian follower who receives morality from authority figures or are you able to determine right and wrong on your own despite pressure to conform” is the real moral test of the Bible, in this story, rather than being a test of obedience and self denial.
2. Many ancient cultures have myths about intelligent reptiles or sea people who taught them mathematics, astronomy and medicine, as well as what could be construed as UFOs. It isn’t necessary to the plot, you’re right of course, but it’s there for world building.
3. The breeding pair brought to the habitat had their memories erased. I intended this to mean they were reverted to a nearly feral state, but I suppose it’s still in question how much they would forget, if they did not forget language and need to reinvent it. This could probably have used more thought.
Am I late to the party in proposing that hallucination, if actually unsolvable, may be a blessing in disguise? In that it will ensure copying errors, which descent with modification depends upon?
Ah yes, the age old struggle. “Don’t listen to them, listen to me!” In Deuteronomy 4:2 Moses declares, “You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commands of the Lord your God which I command you.” And yet, we still saw Christianity, Islam and Mormonism follow it.
A conspiracy theory about Jeffrey Epstein has 264 votes currently: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/hurF9uFGkJYXzpHEE/a-non-magical-explanation-of-jeffrey-epstein
How commonly are arguments on LessWrong aimed at specific users? Sometimes, certainly. But it seems the rule, rather than the exception, that articles here dissect commonly encountered lines of thought, absent any attribution. Are they targeting “someone not in the room”? Do we need to put a face to every position?
By the by, “They’re making cognitive errors” is an insultingly reductive way to characterize, for instance, the examination of value hierarchies and how awareness of them vs unawareness influence both our reasoning and appraisal of our fellow man’s morals.
When I tried, it didn’t work. I don’t know why. I agree with the premise of your article, having noticed that phenomenon in journalism myself before. I suppose when I say truth, I don’t mean the same thing you do, because it’s selective and with dishonest intent.
“Saying you put the value of truth above your value of morality on your list of values is analogous to saying you put your moral of truth above your moral of values; it’s like saying bananas are more fruity to you than fruits.”
I’m not sure if I understand your meaning here. Do you mean that truth and morality are one in the same, or that one is a subset of the other?
”Where does non-misleadingness fall on your list of supposedly amoral values such as truth and morality? Is non-misleadingness higher than truth or lower?”
Surely to be truthful is to be non-misleading...?
I suppose I was assuming non-wrapper AI, and should have specified that. The premise is that we’ve created an authentically conscious AI.
I purposefully left it indeterminate so readers could fill in the blanks with their own theories. But broadly it represents a full, immediate and uncontrolled comprehension of recursive, fractal infinity. The pattern of relationships between all things at every scale, microcosm and macrocosm.
More specifically to the story I like to think they were never human, but always those creatures dreaming they were humans, shutting out the awful truth using the dome which represents brainwashing / compartmentalization. Although I am not dead-set on this interpretation and have written other stories in this setting which contradict it.
Incidentally this story was inspired by the following two songs: