~[agent foundations]
Mateusz Bagiński
Karma: 788
Actually, it might be it, thanks!
The Schelling-point-ness of these memes seems to me to be secondary to (all inter-related):
memetic fit (within a certain demographic, conditional on the person/group already adopting certain beliefs/attitudes/norms etc)
being a self-correcting/stable attractor in the memespace
being easy to communicate and hold all the relevant parts in your mind at once
You discuss all of that but I read the post as saying something like “we need Schelling points, therefore we have to produce memetic attractors to serve as such Schelling points”, whereas I think that typically first a memeplex emerges, and then people start coordinating around it without much reflection. (Well, arguably this is true of most Schelling points.)
Here’s one more idea that I think I’ve seen mentioned somewhere and so far hasn’t spread but might become a Schelling point
AI summer—AI has brought a lot of possibilities but the road further ahead is fraught with risks. Let’s therefore pause fundamental research and focus on reaping the benefits of the state of AI that we already have.
I think I saw a LW post that was discussing alternatives to the vNM independence axiom. I also think (low confidence) it was by Rob Bensinger and in response to Scott’s geometric rationality (e.g. this post). For the hell of me, I can’t find it. Unless my memory is mistaken, does anybody know what I’m talking about?
ideas of Eigenmorality and Eigenkarma[3].
broken links
recently[1].
empty footnote
What kind of interpretability work do you consider plausibly useful or at least not counterproductive?
2. Task uncertainty with reasonable prior on goal drift—the system is unsure about the task it tries to do and seeks human inputs about it.
“Task uncertainty with reasonable prior…” sounds to me like an overly-specific operationalization, but I think this desideratum is gesturing at visibility/correctability.
To me, “unsure about the task it tries to do” sounds more like applicability to a wide range of problems.
useless or counterproductive things due to missing it.
What kind of work do you think of?
Formal frameworks considered in isolation can’t be wrong. Still, they often come with some claims like “framework F formalizes some intuitive (desirable?) property or specifies the right way to do some X and therefore should be used in such-and-such real-world situations”. These can be disputed and I expect that when somebody claims like “{Bayesianism, utilitarianism, classical logic, etc} is wrong”, that’s what they mean.
(Vague shower thought, not standing strongly behind it)
Maybe it is the case that most people as individuals “just want frisbee and tea” but once religion (or rather the very broad class of ~”social practices” some subset/projection of which we round up to “religion”) evolved and lowered the activation energy of people’s hive switch, they became more inclined to appreciate the beauty of Cathedrals and Gregorian chants, etc.
In other words, people’s ability to want/appreciate/[see value/beauty in X] depends largely on the social structure they are embedded in, the framework they adopt to make sense of the world etc. (The selection pressures that led to religion didn’t entirely reduce to “somebody wanting something”, so at least that part is not question-begging [I think].)
For good analysis of this, search for the heading “The data wall” here.
Did you mean to insert a link here?
Intentional
Lure for
Improvised
Acronym
Derivation
You’re right, fixed, thanks!
In response, some companies began listing warrant canaries on their websites—sentences stating that they had never yet been forced to reveal any client data. If at some point they did receive such a warrant, they could then remove the canary without violating their legal non-disclosure obligation, thereby allowing the public to gain indirect evidence about this otherwise-invisible surveillance.
Can the gov force them not to remove the canary?
Less Anti-Dakka
It wasn’t me but it’s probably about spreading AI capabilities-relevant knowledge.
He openly stated that he had left OA because he lost confidence that they would manage singularity responsibly. Had he signed the NDA, he would be prohibited from saying that.
According to this plant-based-leaning but also somewhat vegan-critical blog led by a sports nutritionist, eating 4 doses of soy per day (120 g of soybeans) is safe for male hormonal balance. It’s in Polish but Google translate should handle. He cities studies. https://www.damianparol.com/soja-i-testosteron/
from Eric Weinstein in a youtube video.
Can you link?
Should be ”(1−p) to C”