Let’s go with this analogy. The good thing to do is ask a variety of experts for safety evaluations, run the code through a wide variety of tests, etc. The think NOT to do is keep the code a secret while looking for mistakes all by yourself.
No, if you don’t want to use code you don’t give the code to a variety of experts for safety evaluations but you simply don’t run the code.
Having a public discussion is like running the code untested on a mission critical system.
What utility do you think is gained by discussing the basilisk?
and it’s certainly not a good habit.
Strawman. This forum is not a place where things get habitually banned.
What utility do you think is gained by discussing the basilisk?
An interesting discussion that leads to better understanding of decision theories? Like, the same utility as is gained by any other discussion on LW, pretty much.
Strawman. This forum is not a place where things get habitually banned.
Sure, but you’re the one that was going on about the importance of the mindset and culture; since you brought it up in the context of banning discussion, it sounded like you were saying that such censorship was part of a mindset/culture that you approve of.
Like, the same utility as is gained by any other discussion on LW, pretty much.
Not every discussion on LW has the same utility.
You engage in a pattern of simplifying the subject and then complaining that your flawed understanding doesn’t make sense.
Sure, but you’re the one that was going on about the importance of the mindset and culture
LW doesn’t have a culture with habitual banning discussion. Claiming that it has it is wrong.
I’m claiming that particular actions of Eliezer come out of being concerned about safety. I don’t claim that Eliezer engages in habitual banning on LW because of those concerns.
Just FYI, if you want a productive discussion you should hold back on accusing your opponents of fallacies. Ironically, since I never claimed that you claimed Eliezer engages in habitual banning on LW, your accusation that I made a strawman argument is itself a strawman argument.
Anyway, we’re not getting anywhere, so let’s disengage.
No, if you don’t want to use code you don’t give the code to a variety of experts for safety evaluations but you simply don’t run the code. Having a public discussion is like running the code untested on a mission critical system.
What utility do you think is gained by discussing the basilisk?
Strawman. This forum is not a place where things get habitually banned.
An interesting discussion that leads to better understanding of decision theories? Like, the same utility as is gained by any other discussion on LW, pretty much.
Sure, but you’re the one that was going on about the importance of the mindset and culture; since you brought it up in the context of banning discussion, it sounded like you were saying that such censorship was part of a mindset/culture that you approve of.
Not every discussion on LW has the same utility.
You engage in a pattern of simplifying the subject and then complaining that your flawed understanding doesn’t make sense.
LW doesn’t have a culture with habitual banning discussion. Claiming that it has it is wrong.
I’m claiming that particular actions of Eliezer come out of being concerned about safety. I don’t claim that Eliezer engages in habitual banning on LW because of those concerns.
It’s a complete strawman that you are making up.
Just FYI, if you want a productive discussion you should hold back on accusing your opponents of fallacies. Ironically, since I never claimed that you claimed Eliezer engages in habitual banning on LW, your accusation that I made a strawman argument is itself a strawman argument.
Anyway, we’re not getting anywhere, so let’s disengage.