NumberWangMan

8 ms·

31.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
What we've done to the planet is perhaps less a consequence intelligence, more a consequence of multi-polar traps. Though it's in our collective self-interest to protect the planet, it's in our individual self interest to ig
32.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
Apparently GPT-4 is getting pretty good at knowing when it's wrong: https://thezvi.substack.com/p/ai-26-fine-tuning-time#%C2%A7g... (They asked GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 "are you sure" to see if it would change
33.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
I wouldn't call them a drop in the ocean. You're right that personal cars are only one of many emissions sources, though. Ideally, we should try to reduce emissions as much as possible in every way possible, prioritizing those th
34.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
I think... flipping it around a bit, for this to be a reasonable response, then it must be a grave threat to humanity, and you want to be really sure. It's rational to be wary of beliefs that lead you to drastic actions like this, as
35.
Cleaving the Gordian Knot(jackdevanney.substack.com)
2 points by NumberWangMan 3y ago|0 comments
36.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
Is there a definition of intelligence that rules out large language models, but that does not also rule out large portions of humanity? A lot of people would readily admit that they don't have programming aptitude and would probably e
37.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
Yes. A revenue-neutral carbon tax (often called "Carbon Fee & Dividend") is a politically feasible, fast, efficient way to reduce carbon emissions. To drive emissions down to zero, without massive economic disruption, start s
38.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
To say that climate change is not an "existential risk" is not the same as saying that it's not a massive problem, or that we should not address it, right?
39.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
Interestingly, one practical tactic for increasing walkability in cities is to focus on increasing the re-usability of parking. People who live in an apartment and drive to work don't need their parking space during the day, so someti
40.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
I think of companies asking for regulation as a bit less of "hold me back!" and "we're getting to a cliff where there's a lot of good stuff at the top, but we all need to stop before we fall off it and I don't
41.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
That's true for today. If what happened with chess happens with LLMs, they're going to blow past us in reasoning ability in a few short years. And it might not be LLMs, it might be a new architecture, maybe one that has an LLM a
42.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
> First, it isn’t even close to the sort of artificial superintelligence that might conceivably pose a threat to humankind. The models underpinning it are slow learners that require immense volumes of data to construct anything akin to t
43.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
> In the absence of solid evidence for the existence of a thing, assuming its nonexistence is the logical position. I disagree very strongly both with this statement, and the idea that there is no evidence we can create AGI. Absence of
44.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
I've found a sort of pattern in people's reluctance to believe that AGI poses an existential risk. If you think of specific scenarios about how AIs could take over the world or kill everyone, people will say, "oh, that'
45.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
I think of the extinction worry as an extention of the oppression worry. It would make sense, as AI capabilities grow, for it to replace most or all humans for positions within any company that aren't physical labor, including, even
46.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
It's very unlikely we'll make AGI that's just as smart as a human but no smarter. And as hardware gets better and algorithms get better, AGI will not be even roughly as smart as a human for long, unless we somehow to control
47.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
Also, life isn't fair, there's nothing that says we only get a manageable amount of problems at once.
48.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
Hiya Chubot, (fan of Oil by the way, thanks so much for your work!) I read the article you linked to, both parts. I wonder how much of people having psychotic breaks in the rationalist community is due to 1) people with tendencies toward m
49.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
> perhaps AI will be generally intelligent, but please for the love of god, let's only consider that scenario what it actually happens. This only makes sense if you think that at that point, it will not be a "the genie is out o
50.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
> Indeed, focusing on this particular threat might exacerbate the more likely risks. The history of technology to date suggests that the greatest risks come not from technology itself, but from the people who control the technology using
51.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
When you have no clue, it makes sense to expand your confidence interval in both directions. So it could be a lot longer than we expect, but it could be shorter, too. You shouldn't just say "we have no clue, so it's probabl
52.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
Well, in that situation, are you likely to be someone who can afford to otherwise live in a single-family home with a yard? If so, you can move there. If not, your other option is probably just to be in an apartment without any sort of ya
53.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
I think it could be done. Or rather, instead of putting the genie back in the bottle, we could slow it down enough that we figure out how to ask it for wishes in a way that avoids all the monkey-paw's scenarios. Dropping the metaphor,
54.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
I think it's both an acceleration of the existing risk you are talking about, but it's also a new risk in the sense that quantity has its own quality. It's why you might want to restrict people from owning fully automatic ri
55.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
Ok, so if we take AI safety / AI existential risk as real and important, there are two possibilities: 1) The only way to be safe is to cede control to the most powerful models to a small group (highly regulated corporations or governme
56.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
Not to mention how close the USA and Soviet Union were to a nuclear exchange: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Soviet_nuclear_false_alar...
57.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
Oil industries downplaying the risks makes a lot more sense. If you think that climate change will happen, but it'll happen after you're dead, and you'll be able to leave your kids a big inheritance so they'll be able t
58.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
Whether an argument is "convincing" is relative to the listener, but I can try! Paul Christiano lays out his view of how he thinks things may go: https://www.alignmentforum.org/posts/HBxe6wdjxK239zajf/wha
59.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
Is that what high density advocates want? I'm very pro-density, but that can easily take the form of a square low-rise apartment block surrounding a shared enclosed courtyard that lots of children can play in together, without any ris
60.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
Heh, forgive me if I find the metaphor of “let’s send all of humanity into a black hole because it might be great” less than comforting. I think the most likely scenario where we make something much smarter than us is bad. I don’t agree wi

More ›