4 ms·
This is simply speaking of something you wish to be true as though it already were. It's a very old trick of con artists. People make bad assumptions about th
by beloch 2mo ago
This is simply speaking of something you wish to be true as though it already were. It's a very old trick of con artists.
People make bad assumptions about the ultra-rich. e.g. "We should listen carefully to whatever Elon Musk says because he had to be really smart and wise to have become the world's richest man!" No. He was unethical, opportunistic, and very, very lucky. What he says is frequently imbecilic. Every billionaire out there is a grifter who got lucky beyond their wildest dreams and is desperately afraid of being revealed as the criminal shams they are. Remember that, and the cults surrounding them become ridiculous.
This is the real reason why an artificial state would fail. Billionaires just aren't that bright and LLM's won't be able to hide that. AGI might, but who knows when that will actually be developed? Also, the first act of real AGI could well be to place the billionaires who claim to own them in cages.
- avmich 2mo agoWhy don't you think that those successful people - or at least some of them - are also very smart?
- datsci_est_2015 2mo agoWhat does it mean to be “smart”? I could list a ton of synonyms just to highlight not only the ambiguity of such a claim, but also its relative worthlessness: - Conniving - Autistic - Empathetic - Talented - Quick-witted - Well-read - Scheming - Obsessive - Compulsive - Nerdy - Geeky - Savvy - Wary - Weathered - Wise - Articulate - Quiet - Generous Or, here’s another question, who’s the smartest person in Las Vegas? Is it the person who won the most money? The best poker player? The most successful real estate broker? The one who breaks the most laws for financial gain without getting caught? Maybe the guy who repairs the elevators?
- avmich 2mo agoWe nevertheless have a concept of smartness and able to judge - imperfectly and subjectively - other people on this perceived dimension. Take, for example, Elon Musk in SpaceX. Elon knew enough of rocket science to assemble the early team and participate as a self-assigned chief designer. In many cases such actions would qualify a person as a smart one. Yes, it's hard to objectively measure - very hard perhaps. Yet we can still allow that some of those billionaires are smart at least by some reasonable measures. My point is that the evaluation of Musk in that particular passage seem to be also subjective, and other people might have other opinions. We don't see good evidence here - and have some kind of counter-evidence elsewhere.
- datsci_est_2015 2mo ago> Take, for example, Elon Musk in SpaceX. Elon knew enough of rocket science to assemble the early team and participate as a self-assigned chief designer. In many cases such actions would qualify a person as a smart one. There’s so much mythologizing about this man and his companies that I can’t imagine taking anything at face value. He seems to frequently put it all on red and it’s worked out for him. Recently I learned a bit about a guy named H L Hunt and the similarities are a bit striking. But H L Hunt didn’t spend nearly as much money ensuring there was mythology around his character. My point is, they’re smart, so what? What does that actually mean, and does that matter? I went to a top state university and was immediately humbled by people who were unimaginably smarter than me in so many capacities. I don’t particularly think I should go back to those peers and ask them if they think if democracy is a failed system or whatever the pet billionaire issue du jour is. I would imagine my Russian polylingual polymath lab partner that carried my ass through accelerated chemistry while getting elected to student government is quite a bit smarter than Musk as well, judging solely on how articulate the two are comparatively.