Ben Goertzel’s projects are knowably hopeless, so I didn’t too strongly oppose Tyler Emerson’s project from within SIAI’s then-Board of Directors; it was being argued to have political benefits, and I saw no noticeable x-risk so I didn’t expend my own political capital to veto it, just sighed. Nowadays the Board would not vote for this.
And it is also true that, in the hypothetical counterfactual conditional where Goertzel’s creations work, we all die. I’d phrase the email message differently today to avoid any appearance of endorsing the probability, because today I understand better that most people have trouble mentally separating hypotheticals. But the hypothetical is still true in that counterfactual universe, if not in this one.
Also, in the hypothetical counterfactual conditional where Goertzel’s creations work, we all die
What’s about hypothetical counterfactual conditional where you run into some AGI software that you think will work? Should I assume zero positive rate for ‘you think it works’?
I’d phrase the email message differently today to avoid any appearance of endorsing the probability, because today I understand better that most people have trouble mentally separating hypotheticals.
Really, so it is invalid to make a hypothetical that if someone has a project that you think will work, you may think that we are all going to die unless that project is stopped?
Ben Goertzel’s projects are knowably hopeless, so I didn’t too strongly oppose Tyler Emerson’s project from within SIAI’s then-Board of Directors; it was being argued to have political benefits, and I saw no noticeable x-risk so I didn’t expend my own political capital to veto it, just sighed. Nowadays the Board would not vote for this.
And it is also true that, in the hypothetical counterfactual conditional where Goertzel’s creations work, we all die. I’d phrase the email message differently today to avoid any appearance of endorsing the probability, because today I understand better that most people have trouble mentally separating hypotheticals. But the hypothetical is still true in that counterfactual universe, if not in this one.
There is no contradiction here.
To clarify, by “kind of insane” I didn’t mean you personally, but was commenting on SIAI’s group rationality at that time.
What’s about hypothetical counterfactual conditional where you run into some AGI software that you think will work? Should I assume zero positive rate for ‘you think it works’?
Really, so it is invalid to make a hypothetical that if someone has a project that you think will work, you may think that we are all going to die unless that project is stopped?