The gray fallacy strikes again, the point is to be lesswrong!
lesswronguser123
Karma: 14
Most of this just seems to be nitpicking lack of specificity of implicit assumptions which were self-evident (to me), the criticism regarding “blue” pretty much depends on whether the html blue also needs an interpreter(Eg;human brain) to extract the information.
The lack of formality seems (to me as a new user) a repeated criticism of the sequences but, I thought that was also a self-evident assumption (maybe I’m just falling prey to the expecting short inferential distance bias) I think Eliezer has mentioned 16 years ago here:
“This blog is directed at a wider audience at least half the time, according to its policy. I’m not sure how else you think this post should have been written.”
I personally find sequences to be useful aggregator of various ideas I seem to find intriguing at the moment...
I found a related article prior to this on this topic which seems to be expanding about the same thing.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1745691610393528
Like “IRC chat”
I don’t think that aged well :)
It would also be quite terrible for safety if AGI was developed during a global war, which seems uncomfortably likely (~10% imo).
This may be likely, iirc during wars countries tend to spend more on research and they could potentially just race to AGI like what happened with space race. Which could make hard takeoff even more likely.
I laughed multiple times while reading this one. I was severely underestimating the general concept of intelligence. Almost felt like someone intentionally targeted my past self’s misconceptions lol.
The description is much better evidence, but the attractiveness remains somewhat important.
I would like to disagree on this one, if all of the major accomplishments of the candidate is written on that description then the attractiveness doesn’t really matter as an evidence for intelligence, it’s already been taken into account in that description.
. I think self-critical awareness will always slip at the crucial moment
The point is to be lesswrong! :)
https://intelligence.org/files/AIPosNegFactor.pdf
is the missing citations
It was perfectly all right for Isaac Newton to explain just gravity, just the way things fall down—and how planets orbit the Sun, and how the Moon generates the tides—but not the role of money in human society or how the heart pumps blood.
This just reminds of the Unix software philosophy “do one thing and do it well”
Eliezer to me seems to be against the “death gives life meaning” cache from what I am able to predict so far since he seems to support cryonics,transhumanism etc
The vast majority who go about repeating the Deep Wisdom are more duped than duplicitous, more self-deceived than deceiving.
“One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.”
― Carl Sagan
I think you referring to ultimate-proximate explanation in context of evolution.
Eg; It is a proximate desire for Humans to have sex which manifests due to the ultimate causes i.e. natural selection.
“The difference between proximate and ultimate explanations of behavior is central to evolutionary explanation (Mayr, 1963; Tinbergen, 1963). Ultimate explanations are concerned with the fitness consequences of a trait or behavior and whether it is (or is not) selected. In contrast, proximate explanations are concerned with the mechanisms that underpin the trait or behavior—that is, how it works. Put another way, ultimate explanations address evolutionary function (the “why” question), and proximate explanations address the way in which that functionality is achieved (the “how” question). Another way to think about this distinction is to say that proximate mechanisms are behavior generators, whereas ultimate functions explain why those behaviors are favored.”
you were not the target audience of this post, it did convince me for correspondence theory of Truth for its pragmatic value.
In terms of humanly realistic psychology, the Muslims who flew planes into the World Trade Center undoubtedly saw themselves as heroes defending truth, justice, and the Islamic Way from hideous alien monsters a la the movie Independence Day. Only a very inexperienced nerd, the sort of nerd who has no idea how non-nerds see the world, would say this out loud in an Alabama bar.
I feel called out, I did this at a funeral 3 months ago lol they stared at me like “wtf?” …ah in hindsight I could have controlled that impulse to specify that, now they would be brewing some easily avoidable stereotypes which would hinder my quality of life.
A simpler way to put this is “Reality does not change whether you believe in it or not but it effects you regardless”
Edit: LW actually made a song/album out of this one!
Hey there! I just got curious while reading steven pinker’s book on rationality about the “rationality community” he keeps referring about then I saw him mentioning trying to be “less wrong” and then I searched it up to stumble upon this place. You guys read and write a lot just browsing here, maybe I should focus on increasing my attention span even more.
Ever since they killed (or made it harder to host) nitter,rss,guest accounts etc. Twitter has been out of my life for the better. I find the twitter UX in terms of performance, chronological posts, subscriptions to be sub-optimal. If I do create an account my “home” feed has too much ingroup v/s outgroup kind of content (even within tech enthusiasts circle thanks to the AI safety vs e/acc debate etc), verified users are over-represented by design but it buries the good posts from non-verified. Elon is trying wayy too hard to prevent AI web scrapers ruining my workflow .