Mientras

• Mientras 13 Sep 2022 11:02 UTC

  1 point

  1

  in reply to: Shiroe’s comment on: Should you re­frain from hav­ing chil­dren be­cause of the ex­is­ten­tial risk posed by ar­tifi­cial in­tel­li­gence?

  I don’t doubt that slow take-off is risky. I rather meant that foom is not guaranteed, and risk due a not-immediately-omnipotent AI make be more like a catastrophic, painful war.

• Mientras 10 Sep 2022 19:08 UTC

  1 point

  3

  in reply to: Shiroe’s comment on: Should you re­frain from hav­ing chil­dren be­cause of the ex­is­ten­tial risk posed by ar­tifi­cial in­tel­li­gence?

  Isn’t there a certain amount of disagreement about whether FOOM is the necessary thing to happen?

• Mientras 10 Sep 2022 19:06 UTC

  1 point

  0

  in reply to: JBlack’s comment on: Should you re­frain from hav­ing chil­dren be­cause of the ex­is­ten­tial risk posed by ar­tifi­cial in­tel­li­gence?

  I think the comparison to cancer etc is helpful, thanks.

  The suicide option is a somewhat strange but maybe helpful perspective, as it simplifies the original question by splitting it:

  1. Do you consider a life worth living that ends in a situation in which suicide is the best option?

  2. How likely will this be the case for most people in our relatively soon future? (Including because of AI)

• Mientras 10 Sep 2022 19:00 UTC

  1 point

  0

  in reply to: the gears to ascension’s comment on: Should you re­frain from hav­ing chil­dren be­cause of the ex­is­ten­tial risk posed by ar­tifi­cial in­tel­li­gence?

  Of course everyone can apply their own criteria, but:

  1. I think it is a bit weird to downvote a question, except if the question is extremely stupid. I also would not know a better place to ask it, except maybe the ea forum.

  2. This is a question about the effects of unaligned AGI, and which kind of world to expect from it. For me that is at least relevant to the question of how I should try making the world better.

  3. What do you mean by “AI tag”?

• Mientras 10 Sep 2022 9:16 UTC

  1 point

  0

  in reply to: m2jr’s comment on: Should you re­frain from hav­ing chil­dren be­cause of the ex­is­ten­tial risk posed by ar­tifi­cial in­tel­li­gence?

  Thank you for your comment. It is very helpful. But may I ask what your personal expectations are regarding the world in 2040?

• Mientras 10 Sep 2022 7:29 UTC

  4 points

  0

  on: Should you re­frain from hav­ing chil­dren be­cause of the ex­is­ten­tial risk posed by ar­tifi­cial in­tel­li­gence?

  Oh LessWrong people, please explain to me why asking this question got a negative score.

• Mientras 10 Sep 2022 7:28 UTC

  1 point

  0

  in reply to: Signer’s comment on: Should you re­frain from hav­ing chil­dren be­cause of the ex­is­ten­tial risk posed by ar­tifi­cial in­tel­li­gence?

  Thanks, but the “helping” part would only help if the kids get old enough and are talented and willing to do so, right? Also, if I were born to become cannonfodder, I would be quite angry, I guess.

• Mientras 9 Sep 2022 19:49 UTC

  1 point

  0

  in reply to: Dagon’s comment on: Should you re­frain from hav­ing chil­dren be­cause of the ex­is­ten­tial risk posed by ar­tifi­cial in­tel­li­gence?

  Interesting perspective. So you think the lives were unpleasant on average, but still good enough?

• Mientras 9 Sep 2022 19:47 UTC

  1 point

  0

  in reply to: roystgnr’s comment on: Should you re­frain from hav­ing chil­dren be­cause of the ex­is­ten­tial risk posed by ar­tifi­cial in­tel­li­gence?

  Thanks, but I am not convinced that the first AI that turns against humans and wins automatically has to be an AI that is extremely powerful in all dimensions. Skynet may be cartoonish, but why shouldn’t the first AI that moves against humankind be one that controls a large part of the US nukes while not being able to manipulate germs?