4 ms·
I find Zvi Mowshowitz to be the best source available (https://thezvi.substack.com/ https://thezvi.substack.com/). He’s in the X-risk camp (and so am I) but see
by jprete 3y ago
I find Zvi Mowshowitz to be the best source available (https://thezvi.substack.com/ https://thezvi.substack.com/). He’s in the X-risk camp (and so am I) but seems to have a clear view of some AI things being exciting, others being dangerous, and still others being irrelevant.
I don’t trust most AI-positive sources because they almost never have anything negative to say at all, so they’re clearly in it to hype AI and not to inform anyone of true things. I don’t trust Gary Marcus’s opinion for a similar reason.
- ShamelessC 3y agoX-risk camp?
- munchler 3y agoExistential risk, I think. https://www.lesswrong.com/tag/existential-risk https://www.lesswrong.com/tag/existential-risk
- ShamelessC 3y agoAh so like a Yudkowsky type then? I don't want to lump them all into the same category, but since "X-risk" is given as a category I would just say that they're likely all very well educated, and for some reason deeply deeply misguided by some sort of philosophical hunch that is not rooted in actual current research but in thought experiments. Yudkowsky tends not to respond well or at all to criticism either. For real just go see the criticisms written on that site about his views on runaway AGI and how we get "one critical chance" to stop it from killing us all. His response is effectively "this post is very long, could you summarize the best bits?" and then doesn't respond any further. Less on topic, I'm becoming convinced that lesswrong is where researchers who couldn't get published go to feel like they got published and peer reviewed, when in reality they are getting peer reviewed by a massive echo chamber. Even less on topic and potentially downvote-inciting; it looks less like an echo chamber and more like a sort of social-media-first cult every day.
- jprete 3y agoBy X-risk person I just mean someone who thinks AI does have near-existential risks, and those risks are significant enough to merit being a top consideration in making decisions about AI. I don’t personally base my stances on Yudkowsky’s ideas, and never got into Lesswrong.
- trashface 3y agoZvi is definitely not like Yud, he's much more balanced. He is concerned about X-Risk but he seems to give reasonable space to the opposing arguments. He has a specific section "Other People Are Not As Worried About AI Killing Everyone" for this in his roundups. His roundups also cover a lot of things going on in AI and don't just hyperfocus on safety as the one and only important thing.
- theptip 3y agoHinton and Bengio are also in the x-risk camp, if you want an appeal to authority.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- mistrial9 3y agohumans using AI in competing teams will cause the destruction of ${CIV}