5 ms·

No. Total energy dissipation is at best a crude proxy for progress, because efficiency. That is, the goal of progress is not to expend as many calories as pos

No. Total energy dissipation is at best a crude proxy for progress, because efficiency. That is, the goal of progress is not to expend as many calories as possible, eh? Is it not preferable to achieve one's goal with as little expenditure of energy as needed? (Fewer lines of code is better than more.) Especially today when our biggest problems are the result of flagrant consumption and pollution on mass scale I think it's time to get into the nuances of how we supply ourselves with the good life without dissipating so much energy. In order to measure "progress" you have to determine what is good, which is an open-ended question that increases in difficulty as one's intelligence grows (so AI cannot help answer it no matter how powerful they are, and GAIs will be stuck in the same boat as we.) In the wise words of the great philosopher Douglas Adams: > The History of every major Galactic Civilization tends to pass through three distinct and recognizable phases, those of Survival, Inquiry and Sophistication, otherwise known as the How, Why, and Where phases. For instance, the first phase is characterized by the question 'How can we eat?' the second by the question 'Why do we eat?' and the third by the question 'Where shall we have lunch?'

karmakurtisaani 2y ago
> No. Total energy dissipation is at best a crude proxy for progress, because efficiency. I'm not so sure about that. Let's say humanity finds a way to build a sophisticated torment nexus and the infrastructure to power it. Then, one day a way is found to make it 5 times more energy efficient. As a result, we will have 5 torment nexuses (nexi?), not less energy consumption.
- carapace 2y ago
  > Let's say humanity finds a way to build a sophisticated torment nexus ... No. I decline to say that at this time. Thank you. (I keep a little pickled Roko's basilisk in a jar on my bookshelf. I sometimes take it down and shake it at errant logicians to tease them. I know I shouldn't but it's just so funny.)
  - ahazred8ta 2y ago
    You can get an "I funded the basilisk" certificate - https://www.basiliskfoundation.com/member https://www.basiliskfoundation.com/member
antisthenes 2y ago
> Total energy dissipation is at best a crude proxy for progress, because efficiency. The relationship is still positive, because of Jevons Paradox. No matter how you see it, even if there are bad diminishing returns to using additional energy, we can find additional useful things to do with it (new ways of recycling, terraforming, high-energy synthesis, etc.) > In order to measure "progress" you have to determine what is good, which is an open-ended question that increases in difficulty as one's intelligence grows Reducing suffering is probably the only universal good that I can think of, but we haven't even managed to come close to making it our priority. So until we focus on that, it's a good goal. The best way to reduce suffering is through good healthcare and keeping a working social contract/order.
- carapace 2y ago
  Jevons Paradox isn't a law of nature. > we can find additional useful things to do with it Useful for what purpose? > Reducing suffering Yes and no. Existence is suffering (you are already in the Torment Nexus), Gurdjieff spoke of the importance of "conscious suffering" but that's not something I want to get into here, today. In any event, the best way to reduce suffering is to touch Ice Nine to your tongue, but where's the fun in that? Once all the suffering is reduced what then? (Sorry if I seem salty or sassy, I'm really just here for interesting and contrsuctive discussion, I swear.)
  - spwa4 2y ago
    > Useful for what purpose? Replacing other processes. If something can be done for very cheap, we find new uses for it. Any economic activity can be done 100 different ways. If something becomes absurdly cheap, we start using that for a LOT of things it wasn't used for before. For example, construction used to have great problems securing suitable building materials, but had great quantities of labor available. Hence, everything was custom. The name of the game was to use every piece of wood, every stone, every last bit of building material that was available in construction. An extreme example is that in order to keep medieval staircases clean and maintained, they were taken apart twice yearly, the individual pieces of wood cleaned, and the stairs reassembled after cleaning. Labor was worthless, so why not? Today, building materials are very cheap compared to labor. So we have extremes like prefab homes, but generally we use large amounts of building materials just to avoid even small amounts of labor. Today, we replace stairs entirely to avoid maintaining the wood they're made of. Especially if it doesn't have to look good. Just buy a premade stair and throw the old one out.
mlsu 2y ago
This seems like the right answer, because in theory couldn't you get more efficient while consuming the same amount? But in practice, it's never the case. Having energy available to consume always increases your quality of life, because it opens doors to make things better. Energy gives you freedom. Freedom not only to simply consume more things that are good (e.g., turning the AC on for longer to be comfortable for longer), but also freedom to improve the baseline (e.g. being able to focus and invent a more efficient heat pump, because you're at a comfortable temperature). To bring this freedom into existence you must have more energy. You cannot make something from nothing.
- carapace 2y ago
  https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2012/04/economist-meets-physicist/ https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2012/04/economist-meets-physicist...

karmakurtisaani 2y ago

> No. Total energy dissipation is at best a crude proxy for progress, because efficiency. I'm not so sure about that. Let's say humanity finds a way to build a sophisticated torment nexus and the infrastructure to power it. Then, one day a way is found to make it 5 times more energy efficient. As a result, we will have 5 torment nexuses (nexi?), not less energy consumption.

carapace 2y ago
> Let's say humanity finds a way to build a sophisticated torment nexus ... No. I decline to say that at this time. Thank you. (I keep a little pickled Roko's basilisk in a jar on my bookshelf. I sometimes take it down and shake it at errant logicians to tease them. I know I shouldn't but it's just so funny.)
- ahazred8ta 2y ago
  You can get an "I funded the basilisk" certificate - https://www.basiliskfoundation.com/member https://www.basiliskfoundation.com/member

antisthenes 2y ago

> Total energy dissipation is at best a crude proxy for progress, because efficiency. The relationship is still positive, because of Jevons Paradox. No matter how you see it, even if there are bad diminishing returns to using additional energy, we can find additional useful things to do with it (new ways of recycling, terraforming, high-energy synthesis, etc.) > In order to measure "progress" you have to determine what is good, which is an open-ended question that increases in difficulty as one's intelligence grows Reducing suffering is probably the only universal good that I can think of, but we haven't even managed to come close to making it our priority. So until we focus on that, it's a good goal. The best way to reduce suffering is through good healthcare and keeping a working social contract/order.

carapace 2y ago
Jevons Paradox isn't a law of nature. > we can find additional useful things to do with it Useful for what purpose? > Reducing suffering Yes and no. Existence is suffering (you are already in the Torment Nexus), Gurdjieff spoke of the importance of "conscious suffering" but that's not something I want to get into here, today. In any event, the best way to reduce suffering is to touch Ice Nine to your tongue, but where's the fun in that? Once all the suffering is reduced what then? (Sorry if I seem salty or sassy, I'm really just here for interesting and contrsuctive discussion, I swear.)
- spwa4 2y ago
  > Useful for what purpose? Replacing other processes. If something can be done for very cheap, we find new uses for it. Any economic activity can be done 100 different ways. If something becomes absurdly cheap, we start using that for a LOT of things it wasn't used for before. For example, construction used to have great problems securing suitable building materials, but had great quantities of labor available. Hence, everything was custom. The name of the game was to use every piece of wood, every stone, every last bit of building material that was available in construction. An extreme example is that in order to keep medieval staircases clean and maintained, they were taken apart twice yearly, the individual pieces of wood cleaned, and the stairs reassembled after cleaning. Labor was worthless, so why not? Today, building materials are very cheap compared to labor. So we have extremes like prefab homes, but generally we use large amounts of building materials just to avoid even small amounts of labor. Today, we replace stairs entirely to avoid maintaining the wood they're made of. Especially if it doesn't have to look good. Just buy a premade stair and throw the old one out.

mlsu 2y ago

This seems like the right answer, because in theory couldn't you get more efficient while consuming the same amount? But in practice, it's never the case. Having energy available to consume always increases your quality of life, because it opens doors to make things better. Energy gives you freedom. Freedom not only to simply consume more things that are good (e.g., turning the AC on for longer to be comfortable for longer), but also freedom to improve the baseline (e.g. being able to focus and invent a more efficient heat pump, because you're at a comfortable temperature). To bring this freedom into existence you must have more energy. You cannot make something from nothing.

carapace 2y ago
https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2012/04/economist-meets-physicist/ https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2012/04/economist-meets-physicist...