6 ms·

If this interests you, check out https://intelligence.org/rationality-ai-zombies/ https://intelligence.org/rationality-ai-zombies/.

by cmrx64 10y ago

davidgerard 10y ago
If that interests you, ask for a chart of the real-world successes of LessWrong readers compared to non-LW readers. Also about the mosquito nets versus AI dialectic in Effective Altruism.
- FeepingCreature 10y ago
  As a LessWrong reader I agree that real-world success should be the defining metric, but want to point out that you can't just compare "LessWrong readers to non-LW readers" - if LW readers are not successful IRL, then it's entirely possible that there's some personality factor that both makes you not successful and makes you read LW. Probably the thing to measure is LW vs. other productivity blogs with a similar audience.
- JoshTriplett 10y ago
  > Also about the mosquito nets versus AI dialectic in Effective Altruism. There's a reasonable debate here about short-term and long-term thinking. "How to save the most lives the most quickly" is not the only reasonable altruistic goal to optimize for. "How to save the most lives over the long-term, and save them permanently rather than just delaying a current inevitable" is worth consideration. And there are already far more people willing to support mosquito nets, and far too few willing to support AGI research, or SENS for that matter.
  - davidgerard 10y ago
    "AGI research" in practice means "give money to MIRI", whose track record of results on pretty much any measure is less than impressive. It is really (and literally) "donate to stuff that demonstrably works" versus "donate to MIRI, with its terrible track record, to do something supported primarily by Pascalian arguments." c.f. http://www.vox.com/2015/8/10/9124145/effective-altruism-global-ai http://www.vox.com/2015/8/10/9124145/effective-altruism-glob... Yudkowsky may have (probably) coined the phrase "effective altruist", but people who aren't living sci-fi dreams are in EA now, and asking rather pointed questions. Never confuse "Effective Altruism" and "altruism that is effective". Whatever "effective" actually means in the given context. Getting back on-topic, there's still no evidence - e.g., a track record of results - that anything within a mile of MIRI/LW is actually any good at all for real-world effectiveness, and things like mosquito nets versus AI as evidence against it. LW sells a sort of "rationalitiness": it sure feels like rationality.
parrellel 10y ago
Yudkowsky, the man who rejects science for Bayesian Reasoning, would like to inform everyone that high school never understood him, and has Absolute Faith in the truth of his utility functions... Also, the strange conviction that logic just stopped changing in the 1800's.

If this interests you, check out https://intelligence.org/rationality-ai-zombies/ https://intelligence.org/rationality-ai-zombies/.

by cmrx64 10y ago

If this interests you, check out https://intelligence.org/rationality-ai-zombies/ https://intelligence.org/rationality-ai-zombies/.

davidgerard 10y ago

If that interests you, ask for a chart of the real-world successes of LessWrong readers compared to non-LW readers. Also about the mosquito nets versus AI dialectic in Effective Altruism.

FeepingCreature 10y ago
As a LessWrong reader I agree that real-world success should be the defining metric, but want to point out that you can't just compare "LessWrong readers to non-LW readers" - if LW readers are not successful IRL, then it's entirely possible that there's some personality factor that both makes you not successful and makes you read LW. Probably the thing to measure is LW vs. other productivity blogs with a similar audience.
JoshTriplett 10y ago
> Also about the mosquito nets versus AI dialectic in Effective Altruism. There's a reasonable debate here about short-term and long-term thinking. "How to save the most lives the most quickly" is not the only reasonable altruistic goal to optimize for. "How to save the most lives over the long-term, and save them permanently rather than just delaying a current inevitable" is worth consideration. And there are already far more people willing to support mosquito nets, and far too few willing to support AGI research, or SENS for that matter.
- davidgerard 10y ago
  "AGI research" in practice means "give money to MIRI", whose track record of results on pretty much any measure is less than impressive. It is really (and literally) "donate to stuff that demonstrably works" versus "donate to MIRI, with its terrible track record, to do something supported primarily by Pascalian arguments." c.f. http://www.vox.com/2015/8/10/9124145/effective-altruism-global-ai http://www.vox.com/2015/8/10/9124145/effective-altruism-glob... Yudkowsky may have (probably) coined the phrase "effective altruist", but people who aren't living sci-fi dreams are in EA now, and asking rather pointed questions. Never confuse "Effective Altruism" and "altruism that is effective". Whatever "effective" actually means in the given context. Getting back on-topic, there's still no evidence - e.g., a track record of results - that anything within a mile of MIRI/LW is actually any good at all for real-world effectiveness, and things like mosquito nets versus AI as evidence against it. LW sells a sort of "rationalitiness": it sure feels like rationality.

parrellel 10y ago

Yudkowsky, the man who rejects science for Bayesian Reasoning, would like to inform everyone that high school never understood him, and has Absolute Faith in the truth of his utility functions... Also, the strange conviction that logic just stopped changing in the 1800's.