2 ms·
I fail to see the misinformation. If he believes in "infohazards" and takes his "timeless decision theory" seriously, then he took this seriously. In fact he to
by jonathankoren 10y ago
I fail to see the misinformation. If he believes in "infohazards" and takes his "timeless decision theory" seriously, then he took this seriously. In fact he took it seriously enough to delete the thread. Nothing he said contradicts these facts.
I'll say it. The guy is a quack. A quack in the robes mathematics rather than medicine, but a quack all the same. No one in philosophy or in mathematics takes these ideas seriously. He never puts these ideas up to peer review, but rather sticks them on his blog where a bunch of people that think of themselves as "smart" and "deep thinkers" read them and nod in agreement. Yet in the end all of these are very very fringe ideas with no evidence either logically or physically to support them.
In the end, Roko's Basilisk, and these ideas of the some potentially benevolent or malevolent AI that controls the the simulation in which we live are indistinguishable from God and his ideas about them are indistinguishable from the same flawed centuries old Pascal's Wager complete with the exact same logical flaws pointed out centuries ago.