Ironically, your comment series is evidence that censorship partially succeeded in this case. Although existential risk could increase, that was not the primary reason for suppressing the idea in the post.
I’ve actually speculated as to whether Eliezer was going MoR:Quirrel on us. Given that aggressive censorship was obviously going to backfire a shrewd agent would not use such an approach if they wanted to actually achieve the superficially apparent goal. Whenever I see an intelligent, rational player do something that seems to be contrary to their interests I take a second look to see if I am understanding what their real motivations are. This is an absolutely vital skill when dealing with people in a corporate environment.
Could it be the case that Eliezer is passionate about wanting people to consider torture:AIs and so did whatever he could to make it seem important to people, even though it meant taking a PR hit in the process? I actually thought this question through for several minutes before feeling it was safe to dismiss the possibility.
So I actually haven’t read MoR—could you summarize the reference for me? I mean, I can basically see what you’re saying from context, but is there anything beyond that it would be useful to know?
My instinct is that it just doesn’t feel like something Eliezer would do. But what do I know?
So I actually haven’t read MoR—could you summarize the reference for me? I mean, I can basically see what you’re saying from context, but is there anything beyond that it would be useful to know?
There isn’t much more to it than can be inferred from the context. MoR:Quirrel is just a clever, devious and rational manipulator.
My instinct is that it just doesn’t feel like something Eliezer would do. But what do I know?
I don’t either… but then that’s the assumption MoR:Harry made about MoR:Dumbledore. At Quirrel’s prompting Harry decided “it was time and past time to ask Draco Malfoy what the other side of that war had to say about the character of Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore.” :)
(Of course EY hasn’t been in a war and I don’t think there are any people who accuse him of being an especially devious political manipulator.)
Ironically, your comment series is evidence that censorship partially succeeded in this case. Although existential risk could increase, that was not the primary reason for suppressing the idea in the post.
Succeeded—in promoting what end?
Streisand Effect
I’ve actually speculated as to whether Eliezer was going MoR:Quirrel on us. Given that aggressive censorship was obviously going to backfire a shrewd agent would not use such an approach if they wanted to actually achieve the superficially apparent goal. Whenever I see an intelligent, rational player do something that seems to be contrary to their interests I take a second look to see if I am understanding what their real motivations are. This is an absolutely vital skill when dealing with people in a corporate environment.
Could it be the case that Eliezer is passionate about wanting people to consider torture:AIs and so did whatever he could to make it seem important to people, even though it meant taking a PR hit in the process? I actually thought this question through for several minutes before feeling it was safe to dismiss the possibility.
So I actually haven’t read MoR—could you summarize the reference for me? I mean, I can basically see what you’re saying from context, but is there anything beyond that it would be useful to know?
My instinct is that it just doesn’t feel like something Eliezer would do. But what do I know?
There isn’t much more to it than can be inferred from the context. MoR:Quirrel is just a clever, devious and rational manipulator.
I don’t either… but then that’s the assumption MoR:Harry made about MoR:Dumbledore. At Quirrel’s prompting Harry decided “it was time and past time to ask Draco Malfoy what the other side of that war had to say about the character of Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore.” :)
(Of course EY hasn’t been in a war and I don’t think there are any people who accuse him of being an especially devious political manipulator.)
I had thought about it and reached no conclusion.