If you have trouble confronting people, you make a poor admin.
Can we please act like we actually know stuff about practical instrumental rationality given how human brains work, and not punish people for openly noticing their weaknesses.
You could have more constructively said something like “Thank you for taking on these responsibilities even though it sometimes makes you uncomfortable. I wonder if anyone else who is more comfortable with that would be willing to help out.”
Yeah, he suffers from spontaneous duplication, which is being treated by his spinster wicket.
I precommit to acting as if I had made any precommittment I find myself wishing I had made. If I make this clear before iterated prisoners’ dilemma, a rational partner would not try the “finger slipped” excuse against me, because I would wish that I had precommitted to punishing defection due to finger slipping.
I would still allow the grieving student to turn in the paper late, because in that situation, I do not wish I had precommitted to rejecting that excuse.
I just donated an additional $2000. Yay for Luke!
I’m convinced AGI is much more likely to be built by a government or major corporation, which makes me more inclined to think movement-building activities are likely to be valuable, to increase the odds of the people at that government or corporation being conscious of AI safety issues, which MIRI isn’t doing.
MIRI’s AI workshops get outside mathematicians and AI researchers involved in FAI research, which is good for movement building within the population of people likely to be involved in creating an AGI.
The Center for World Domination
We prefer to think of it as World Optimization.
In Terry Pratchett’s Discworld series, it is a law of narrative causality that 1 in a million chances work out 9 times out of 10. Some characters once made a difficult thing they were attempting artificially harder, to try to make the probability exactly 1 in a million and invoke this trope.
I predict, with probability ~95%, that if Joe becomes unhappy in the marriage, he and Kate will get divorced, even though Joe and Kate, who is not as powerful a predictor as Omega, currently believe otherwise. Joe is, after all, running this “timeless decision theory” on hostile hardware.
(But I hope that they remain happy, and this prediction remains hypothetical.)
my feeling about CFAR is that they are providing a service to individuals for money and it’s probably not a terrible idea to let the market determine if their services are worth the amount they charge.
I think that CFAR’s workshops are self funding and contribute to paying for organizational overhead. Donated funds allow them to offer scholarships to their workshops to budding Effective Altruists (like college students) and run the SPARC program (targeting mathematically gifted children who may be future AI researchers). So, while CFAR does provide a service to individuals for money, donated money buys more services targeted at making altruistic people more effective and getting qualified people working on important hard problems.
It would have been pretty impressive if I actually did get a girl to sign up for cryonics after she turned me down for a date.
“Negative reinforcement” refers to reinforcement by removing an undesired stimulus. The opposite of “reinforcement” is “punishment”.
I mailed a check for $20,000.
I’m excited about the pivot to research.
Yay recursive reinforcement!
See also Least Convenient Possible World.
I just wrote a check for $13,200.