yanderekko

8 ms·

31.
by yanderekko 3y ago
The line isn't drawn at "literal Nazis", because for all the criticisms one can lob at KF it is clearly not dedicated to Naziism. It platforms Nazis, for sure, but if the argument is either that a large blast radius that hits
32.
by yanderekko 3y ago
I recall reading the other day about Germany making deadnaming a crime..
33.
by yanderekko 3y ago
>My country has a censor's office, for example. Some 'speech' is literally illegal to possess. And it's embarrassing. The KiwiFarms exchange with New Zealand after the Brenton Tarrant shooting (are you even allowed to
34.
by yanderekko 3y ago
The Constitution would not provide a carveout for the long-term censorship of a forum like KF based on some rationale like "creating a volatile atmosphere", so I don't know what you expect regulation to accomplish here. And o
35.
by yanderekko 3y ago
Sure, there are 1A concerns there. But that's not part of the HE issue as far as I'm aware.
36.
by yanderekko 3y ago
It's easy to have a principled stance against both net neutrality and private online censorship. Note that the EFF statement is not calling for legislation to stop HE's behavior.
37.
by yanderekko 3y ago
Net neutrality stopped being a concern when activists decided that it was to their overall advantage to ally with powerful, censorious corporations in order to combat right-wing speech .
38.
by yanderekko 3y ago
>I'd argue that there are legitimate safety concerns that trump speech in this particular case. What makes HE well-positioned to be able to determine what constitutes a "legitimate safety concern"? What happens when a pro-
39.
by yanderekko 3y ago
I mean, to be fair this doesn't really pertain to the sort of Constitutional legal questions that the ACLU famously takes a hardline stance on. I don't think the ACLU endorsing private censorship is clearly at odds with their over
40.
by yanderekko 3y ago
At least payment providers can plausibly point to financial risks and legal concerns as why they engage in what comes off as moral policing. It's pretty clear that any similar claim on HE's part would be pretextual. >It feels l
41.
by yanderekko 3y ago
I just don't believe that unless you have specific quotes you can point to that indicates this.
42.
by yanderekko 3y ago
>A counterpoint — every day tons of financial disputes are handled by banks and insurance companies. Unlike with government, no violence is involved, and things go well. Why involve governments and violence when we can avoid the bad thin
43.
by yanderekko 3y ago
>Thankfully, the site is no longer available via clearweb Untrue, but once enough people know this I'm sure it'll be taken out again. I'd post the link but I'd probably be jeopardizing my YC account..
44.
by yanderekko 3y ago
The nexus between KF harassment and the suicides in two of the three cases is extremely tenuous ("KF had a thread X disliked" -> "X committed suicide" -> "KF induced X's suicide") and in the third th
45.
by yanderekko 3y ago
No, even the more-panicked wing is not betting the proverbial house on AI killing us within the next few years , although the possibility is there. The "don't expect to live much longer" sentiment is based on a probability h
46.
by yanderekko 3y ago
>when the real risk is what people believe machine derived "facts" are It's hard to play out a scenario where this leads to actual human extinction.
47.
by yanderekko 3y ago
It's noteworthy that even if we do see "evil" it'll just be something painted on an underlying veneer of indifference, eg. ChaosGPT.
48.
by yanderekko 3y ago
>So you can continue your performative concerns about Roko’s Basillisk or whatever topic of distant, paralyzing uncertainty is overflowing from the next room into mine. Amusing, usually rationalists are made fun of because the concerns a
49.
by yanderekko 3y ago
Going after mentions of "fields" is going to make 2024 a lot of fun.
50.
by yanderekko 3y ago
>I'd loved to bring up old HN threads announcing the death of Facebook using similar broad strokes. Apparently Meta is the competent one now because they pigeonholed a cloned feature on their platform + the alternative is no longer
51.
by yanderekko 3y ago
Someday, when the AI releases a nanobot swarm comes to kill us all, a philosopher's last words will be "yes, but is it truly intelligent?" before he is broken down into biodiesel that will be used to power the paperclip fac
52.
by yanderekko 3y ago
>If these people were so concerned, they'd by shouting from the hilltops and throwing their entire life savings into stopping us. They would organize workplace walkouts and strikes. There would be protests and banners. Burning data
53.
by yanderekko 3y ago
Sure, but I wouldn't consider it reward hacking if we knowingly gave it the goal of maximizing papercips and it did this. Maybe I'm being pedantic, but that would be a pretty clear due diligence failure on the prompter's faul
54.
by yanderekko 3y ago
>Even if there was a way to gain efficiency through self modification rather than losing it, it would likely hit a plateau of diminishing returns, like most things in the world do. And maybe you're fine with betting your life on tha
55.
by yanderekko 3y ago
Okay. When people say "the future is doomed", I assume they're talking about likely near-term scenarios and not the fact that eventually entropy will dissolve the universe or whatever.
56.
by yanderekko 3y ago
> As always the answer isn't 'cool, let's regulate AI to limit its profitability, thus limiting AI development' but rather 'we should keep throwing money at it, just making sure we throw money at the right partic
57.
by yanderekko 3y ago
>And even if we achieve it, how do we know the AIs won't convince Homo sapiens to simply stop breeding and fade away in alignment with our values? If it could do this, then we should seriously question whether it's actually a b
58.
by yanderekko 3y ago
Does it look so different though? What happens when the LLMs are good enough to propose practical code improvements that will result in more-useful LLMs? And when we start generating LLM-driven agents that actually train and deploy these mo
59.
by yanderekko 3y ago
>These include reward hacking which is a huge problem with LLMs and why they lie and hallucinate so persistently, power seeking behaviour, and developing unanticipated harmful instrumental goals. I'm not sure I'd call it reward
60.
by yanderekko 3y ago
>As it stands now, the future without AI seems pretty doomed too. As pessimistic as the current zeitgeist is, very few imagined futures reasonably result in actual human extinction.

More ›