3 ms·
The prevailing ideas (AKA Eliezer's ideas) do change. They used to be for AI research before they were against it. I am too bothered by the groupthink to hang a
by jacoblyles 14y ago
The prevailing ideas (AKA Eliezer's ideas) do change. They used to be for AI research before they were against it. I am too bothered by the groupthink to hang around for long periods of time. I get enough of it IRL.
- FeepingCreature 14y agoI'm pretty sure he's still for AI research, he just realized he'd been irresponsible about it. I'd much rather people change their mind as they gain greater understanding, as long as they document the reasoning.
- jacoblyles 14y agoIt's just that it gives me the heebee-jeebees to see everybody change their mind together. Eliezer often cites a theorem from a mathematician that says that ideal rational agents can't disagree and applies it to normal conversation. In the LW circle this is used to bully people into conformity. No allowance is given for the time that it takes humans to think things through or negotiate on a set of priors based on their joint life experience. In practice at LW, it means that if you haven't conformed to a result that disturbs you within the course of a single conversation then you must be irrational. Because by Aumann's theorem rational agents will not remain in an undecided state. They really are a bunch of borg.
- mquander 14y agoI hang around with a bunch of LW people both online and in real life, and I really don't think that I've ever seen anyone deploy the kind of rhetoric you're describing when arguing with someone. It sounds unreasonably dumb. On the other hand, I see a lot of examples of people being unusually polite and curious about people who disagree with them, and who try to specifically cultivate the ability to drill down to the root cause of arguments and learn as the result of a dispute.