It sounds like my post rubbed you the wrong way, that wasn’t my intention.
I do understand your math (world pop / a mil), did you understand mine?
Providing a credible threat reduces existential risk and saves lives… significantly more than the 6700 you cite.
Check out this article and the wikipedia article on MAD, then reread the post you’re replying to and see if it makes more sense. The Wei Dai exchange might also help shed some light. If you ask questions here I’ll do my best to walk you through anything you get stuck on.
I don’t feel comfortable talking in too much detail here about my list. If anyone knows a good way for me to reveal one or two methods safely I’m willing.. but it’s not like they’re not rocket science or anything.
Aha! This has happened several times now, and waitingforgodel mentioned something in his reply which clarified what happened. He started from the link to Roko’s name on the top contributors link, which produces only a vague comment about something having been deleted, without the reason, details, or link. Anyone with access to Google can track down the link, but it’ll take them some time, during which they get to fume without an explanation; and it’s pretty much random which part of the story they’ll start out at.
I don’t really object to people who really want to see it tracking down the post and comments, and I realize they certainly can’t be gotten rid of, having been public on the internet for awhile and recognized as controversial. But having people encounter a vague hint at first, and having to track it down—that generates negative emotion, and puts them in an irrational state of mind that makes them want to go start a flamewar about it. It would be much better if the first thing they encountered was a truthful but nonspecific overview of what happened, rather than a tantalizing hint.
Therefore, the solution is for four people to pass 8082 karma. I am going through the archives and voting up worthy posts by contributors 8-10 (cousin_it, AnnaSalamon and Vladimir_Nesov). I will also try to pass that karma mark myself, by finishing up the collection of half-written article ideas I have lying around. (It’s quite a stretch, but it’s also a usable motivator for an otherwise worthy goal).
(Edited to add: I don’t normally support doing funky things with the karma system, but this is important.)
This seems like a highly suboptimal solution. It’s an explicit attempt to remove Roko from the top contributors list… if you/we/EY feels that’s a legitimate thing to do, well then we should just do it directly. And if it isn’t a legitimate thing to do, then we shouldn’t do it via gaming the karma system.
Wouldn’t the easiest solution be just to have Eliezer agree to have Roko’s posts and comments restored (the ones that he voluntarily deleted)? My understanding is that Roko already agreed, and we’re now just waiting on Eliezer’s word. I don’t see any reason why he wouldn’t agree. Has anyone actually asked him directly?
Just to be clear, I didn’t learn about this via the Roko link (nor did I say in PM that I did), I used the Roko link after finding out about it on messages higher up in this thread (July 2010 open thread pt 2). Without the link I would have used the LW search bar.
No biggie, I wouldn’t even mention it except that it seems to be your justification for voting weirdness.
Hey Jim,
It sounds like my post rubbed you the wrong way, that wasn’t my intention.
I do understand your math (world pop / a mil), did you understand mine?
Providing a credible threat reduces existential risk and saves lives… significantly more than the 6700 you cite.
Check out this article and the wikipedia article on MAD, then reread the post you’re replying to and see if it makes more sense. The Wei Dai exchange might also help shed some light. If you ask questions here I’ll do my best to walk you through anything you get stuck on.
I don’t feel comfortable talking in too much detail here about my list. If anyone knows a good way for me to reveal one or two methods safely I’m willing.. but it’s not like they’re not rocket science or anything.
-wfg
(edit: fixed awkward wording in last paragraph)
I am answering this by private message.
Aha! This has happened several times now, and waitingforgodel mentioned something in his reply which clarified what happened. He started from the link to Roko’s name on the top contributors link, which produces only a vague comment about something having been deleted, without the reason, details, or link. Anyone with access to Google can track down the link, but it’ll take them some time, during which they get to fume without an explanation; and it’s pretty much random which part of the story they’ll start out at.
I don’t really object to people who really want to see it tracking down the post and comments, and I realize they certainly can’t be gotten rid of, having been public on the internet for awhile and recognized as controversial. But having people encounter a vague hint at first, and having to track it down—that generates negative emotion, and puts them in an irrational state of mind that makes them want to go start a flamewar about it. It would be much better if the first thing they encountered was a truthful but nonspecific overview of what happened, rather than a tantalizing hint.
Therefore, the solution is for four people to pass 8082 karma. I am going through the archives and voting up worthy posts by contributors 8-10 (cousin_it, AnnaSalamon and Vladimir_Nesov). I will also try to pass that karma mark myself, by finishing up the collection of half-written article ideas I have lying around. (It’s quite a stretch, but it’s also a usable motivator for an otherwise worthy goal).
(Edited to add: I don’t normally support doing funky things with the karma system, but this is important.)
This seems like a highly suboptimal solution. It’s an explicit attempt to remove Roko from the top contributors list… if you/we/EY feels that’s a legitimate thing to do, well then we should just do it directly. And if it isn’t a legitimate thing to do, then we shouldn’t do it via gaming the karma system.
Wouldn’t the easiest solution be just to have Eliezer agree to have Roko’s posts and comments restored (the ones that he voluntarily deleted)? My understanding is that Roko already agreed, and we’re now just waiting on Eliezer’s word. I don’t see any reason why he wouldn’t agree. Has anyone actually asked him directly?
Just to be clear, I didn’t learn about this via the Roko link (nor did I say in PM that I did), I used the Roko link after finding out about it on messages higher up in this thread (July 2010 open thread pt 2). Without the link I would have used the LW search bar.
No biggie, I wouldn’t even mention it except that it seems to be your justification for voting weirdness.
Thankyou. Finding out about the issue via a link from the top posts sounded improbable so I was surprised.
This confirmation makes jimrandomh’s voting scheme even more outrageous.
“People don’t approve of what Eliezer did to Roko… lets hide all evidence that Roko ever existed!”