Feedback: I really like the breakdown of each companies stance on safety, but please skíp the percentage numbers. Its just silly to give a score based on guesswork.
Anders Lindström
Karma: 80
Brace for impact. Everyone with a desk job should start to plan for alternative exit strategies.
Angry that doctors had spent years teaching her to delay treatment by dismissing her concerns.
Sorry for your loss, but thank you for reminding us how precious life is.
The quoted sentence from your post is I believe the main reasons why doctors (doctors not surgeons) will be one of the first high-status professions to be replaced by AI in a couple of years . If you can just get comprehensive blood work done (you could draw blood in a drop-in booth in a mall and send to a lab) and my some pictures taken of your body and then have a conversation with an AI about the symptoms you experience, the need to go to a psychical grumpy stressed doctor is no more needed or even something you would like to do when you will get much much better and consistent results from the AI doctor who treat you with respect and dignity and do no check his or her watch every minute.
And should we still think that a mere text message could increase yields for the hundreds of millions who work in farming?
Maybe. If you can use your phone to take photos of soil samples for image analysis paired with data which crop you intent to grow and weather data, why would it be far fetched to assume that an AI could give not you good advice on irrigation and fertilizers etc via text messages?
Body doubling / coworking; this doesn’t work for everyone, but I find that this robustly lowers the activation energy costs and reduces distractions.
I have found that for me a simple pomodoro timer (25min work/5 minute break) fixes a lot of procrastination issues / distractions. It’s weird how that little timer can make me focus and make me feel responsible to not let my mind wander.
Thank you! The backstory to this is that I have been confused about how there can be so many fake/scam profiles on social media platforms when it should be very easy to detect them with the AI systems they have in place. Both the profile nancygonzalez8451097 and jeffyoung9385500 are “real”. These profiles actually liked one of my photos on Instagram. That gave me the idea to write this story.
The first part of the story is describing what kind of justifications Instagram’s anomaly detection systems must have made to accept nancygonzalez8451097 registration and existence. If nancygonzalez8451097 actually existed, what kind of life would she have led that would have matched what she have put in her profile, and this is one possible life (with a lot of strange coincidences and oddities) that she could have led
The second part of the story is how I see a team meeting at Instagram going down, like that Mark need to be completely out of touch with reality (which he probably is not, which is the great paradox here) to let all these fake/scam profiles roam freely on Instagram and not be willing to do anything about it.I hope my thoughts makes it easier to understand? This is a failure in it self. A story should be able to stand on its own without explanations.
Short story: Who is nancygonzalez8451097
The main reason for developing AI in the first place is to make possible what the headline says: “AI-enabled coups: a small group could use AI to seize power”.
AI-enabled coups are a feature, not a bug.
How about the culture in catholic countries were gays are mistreated and that the culture “demand” young men to to find a wife and get married? One way to opt out of marriage and condemnation for being gay, with your honor intact and that you do not have to reveal your preferences, is to go into priesthood.
Yes, sometimes they are slow, other times they are fast. A private effort to build a nuke or go to the moon in the time frames they did would not have been possible. AFAIK the assumption that Chinese AI development is government directed everyone agrees to, but for some very strange reason people like to think that US AI is directed by a group of quirky nerds that wants to save the world and just happens to get their hands on a MASSIVE amount of compute (worth billions upon billions of dollars). Imagine when the government gets to hear what these nerds are up to in a couple of years...
IF there is any truth to how important the race to AGI/ASI is to win.THEN governments are the key-players in those races.
News of the new models percolates slowly through the US government and beyond.
Well fleshed out scenario, but this kind of assumption is always a dealbreaker for me.
Why would the government not be aware of the development of the mightiest technology and weapon ever created if “we” are aware of it?
Could you please elaborate why you choose to go for the “stupid and uninformed government”, instead of the more plausible scenario where the government actually knows exactly what is going on in every step of the process and is the driving force behind it?
For the majority of human history we lived in a production market for food. We searched for that which tasted well but there was never enough to fill the void. Only the truly elite could afford to import enough food to reach the point of excess.
Humanity ~300.000 years. Agriculture ~12.000 years. We have been hunters and gathers for the vast majority of human history.
Come for the game theory, stay for the slot machines...
Oh, April 1st.
Yes, but as I wrote in the answer to habryka (see below), I am not talking about the present moment. I am concerned with the (near) future. With the break neck speed at which AI is moving it wont be long until it will be hopeless to figure out if its AI generated or not.
So my point and rhetorical question is this: AI is not going to go away. Everyone(!) will use it, all day every day. So instead of trying to come up with arbitrary formulas for how much AI generated content a post can or cannot contain, how can we use AI to the absolute limit to increase the quality of posts and make Lesswrong even better than it already is?!
I know the extremely hard work that a lot of people put into writing their posts, and that the moderators are doing a fantastic job at keeping the standards very high, all of which is much appreciated. Bravo!
But I assume that this policy change is forward looking and that is what I am talking about, the future. We are at the beginning of something truly spectacular that have already yielded results in certain domains that are nothing less than mind blowing. Text generation is one of those fields which have had extreme progress in just a few years time. If this progress continue (which is likely to assume), very soon text generation will be as good or better than the best human writers in pretty much any field.
How do you as moderators expect to keep up with this progress if you want to keep the forum “AI free”? Is there anything more concrete than a mere policy change that could be done to nudge people into NOT posting AI generated content? IMHO Lesswrong is a competition in cleaver ideas and smartness, and I think a fair assumption is that if you can get help from AI to reach “Yudkowsky-level” smartness, you will use it no matter what. Its just like when say athletes use PEDs to get an edge. Winning >> Policies
I understand the motif behind the policy change but its unenforceable and carry no sanctions. In 12-24 months I guess it will be very difficult (impossible) to detect AI spamming. The floodgates are open and you can only appeal to peoples willingness to have a real human to human conversation. But perhaps those conversations are not as interesting as talking to an AI? Those who seek peer validation for their cleverness will use all available tools in doing so no matter what policy there is.
I unfortunately believe that such policy changes are futile. I agree that right now its possible (not 100% by any means) to detect a sh*tpost, at least within a domain a know fairly well. Remember that we are just at the beginning of Q2 2025. Where are we with this Q2 2026 or Q2 2027?
There is no other defense for the oncoming AI forum slaughter than that people find it more valuable to express their own true opinions and ideas then to copy paste or let an agent talk for them.
No policy change is needed, a mindset change is.
Spot on!
Oh, I mean “required” as in to get a degree in a certain subject you need to write a thesis as your rite of passage.
Yes, you are right. Adept or die. AI can be a wonderful tool for learning but as it is used right now, where everyone have to say that they don´t use it, it beyond silly. I guess there will be some kind of reckoning soon.
Since a lot of people disagree with this, please tell me what a score of 100% mean or say 50% or 37%? I am not writing this to provoke, I am genuinely interested to know.