Anders Lindström

Karma: 92

Anders Lindström Jul 21, 2025, 9:17 AM
1 point
0
in reply to: J Bostock’s comment on: OpenAI Claims IMO Gold Medal
Your “Intrigue → Denial → Appreciation → Denial 2 → Fear”—cycle really hits the spot. I will filter future comments from AI pundit through this lens.

Anders Lindström Jul 5, 2025, 9:24 AM
17 points
0
on: Outlive: A Critical Review
Thank you for an excellent post.

The results and studies discussed in the post further validate a feeling I have had about longevity for some time: that there is not much a person living a “normal” life with decent eating, exercise, social, and sleeping habits can do to significantly extend their lifespan. There is no silver bullet that, from a reasonably “normal” health baseline, can routinely give you 5 or 10 extra years, let alone 1 or 2 years.
In this regard, current science has failed, and I think the whole longevity research community needs to reassess the way forward. No matter how much pill-swallowing, cold-bath-taking, HIIT-training, and sleep-optimizing they (we) do, it does not really work.

Anders Lindström Jun 26, 2025, 12:29 PM
1 point
−2
on: Anders Lindström’s Shortform
I wonder, in the aftermath of the US bombing of Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities, how this will affect future possibilities of performing a ‘Yudkowskyan strike’ on datacenters. Will this effectively drive advanced AI development underground to nuclear and bunker bomb proof locations?

Anders Lindström Jun 22, 2025, 4:08 PM
−1 points
−2
in reply to: habryka’s comment on: Habryka’s Shortform Feed
The book will probably be a treat to read, but since “someone” (Open AI, Anthropic, Google, META et al.) apparently WILL build “it” everyone WILL die. Oh well, we had a good run I guess.

Design of the frontpage: No. I am fan of the white clean design with the occasional AI generated image. The current iteration reduces readability a lot.

Anders Lindström Jun 11, 2025, 11:22 AM
−9 points
0
in reply to: ryan_greenblatt’s comment on: ryan_greenblatt’s Shortform
“Employees at OpenAI believed…” — do you mean Sam Altman and the board?
If this information is accurate, it speaks volumes about how flawed their alignment predictions might also be. If a company with vast resources and insider access like OpenAI can’t predict the capabilities of competing firms (a relatively simple problem with objectively knowable answers), how can we expect them to predict the behavior of advanced AI models, where the unknowns are far greater and often unknowable?

Anders Lindström May 29, 2025, 7:33 PM
2 points
0
in reply to: Anders Lindström’s comment on: New scorecard evaluating AI companies on safety
Since a lot of people disagree with this, please tell me what a score of 100% mean or say 50% or 37%? I am not writing this to provoke, I am genuinely interested to know.

Anders Lindström May 29, 2025, 9:54 AM
1 point
−14
on: New scorecard evaluating AI companies on safety
- Feedback: I really like the breakdown of each companies stance on safety, but please skíp the percentage numbers. Its just silly to give a score based on guesswork.

Anders Lindström May 21, 2025, 8:29 AM
1 point
0
on: President of European Commission expects human-level AI by 2026
Brace for impact. Everyone with a desk job should start to plan for alternative exit strategies.

Anders Lindström May 15, 2025, 2:47 PM
5 points
3
on: Too Soon
Angry that doctors had spent years teaching her to delay treatment by dismissing her concerns.

Sorry for your loss, but thank you for reminding us how precious life is.

The quoted sentence from your post is I believe the main reasons why doctors (doctors not surgeons) will be one of the first high-status professions to be replaced by AI in a couple of years . If you can just get comprehensive blood work done (you could draw blood in a drop-in booth in a mall and send to a lab) and my some pictures taken of your body and then have a conversation with an AI about the symptoms you experience, the need to go to a psychical grumpy stressed doctor is no more needed or even something you would like to do when you will get much much better and consistent results from the AI doctor who treat you with respect and dignity and do no check his or her watch every minute.

Anders Lindström May 5, 2025, 11:33 AM
1 point
0
on: Where have all the tokens gone?
And should we still think that a mere text message could increase yields for the hundreds of millions who work in farming?
Maybe. If you can use your phone to take photos of soil samples for image analysis paired with data which crop you intent to grow and weather data, why would it be far fetched to assume that an AI could give not you good advice on irrigation and fertilizers etc via text messages?

Anders Lindström May 5, 2025, 8:56 AM
2 points
1
on: Navigating burnout
Body doubling / coworking; this doesn’t work for everyone, but I find that this robustly lowers the activation energy costs and reduces distractions.
I have found that for me a simple pomodoro timer (25min work/5 minute break) fixes a lot of procrastination issues / distractions. It’s weird how that little timer can make me focus and make me feel responsible to not let my mind wander.

Anders Lindström May 3, 2025, 9:46 AM
5 points
0
in reply to: ErioirE’s comment on: Short story: Who is nancygonzalez8451097
Thank you! The backstory to this is that I have been confused about how there can be so many fake/scam profiles on social media platforms when it should be very easy to detect them with the AI systems they have in place. Both the profile nancygonzalez8451097 and jeffyoung9385500 are “real”. These profiles actually liked one of my photos on Instagram. That gave me the idea to write this story.

The first part of the story is describing what kind of justifications Instagram’s anomaly detection systems must have made to accept nancygonzalez8451097 registration and existence. If nancygonzalez8451097 actually existed, what kind of life would she have led that would have matched what she have put in her profile, and this is one possible life (with a lot of strange coincidences and oddities) that she could have led

The second part of the story is how I see a team meeting at Instagram going down, like that Mark need to be completely out of touch with reality (which he probably is not, which is the great paradox here) to let all these fake/scam profiles roam freely on Instagram and not be willing to do anything about it.
I hope my thoughts makes it easier to understand? This is a failure in it self. A story should be able to stand on its own without explanations.

Anders Lindström Apr 17, 2025, 10:50 AM
3 points
3
on: AI-enabled coups: a small group could use AI to seize power
The main reason for developing AI in the first place is to make possible what the headline says: “AI-enabled coups: a small group could use AI to seize power”.

AI-enabled coups are a feature, not a bug.

Anders Lindström Apr 7, 2025, 8:25 PM
1 point
0
on: How Gay is the Vatican?
How about the culture in catholic countries were gays are mistreated and that the culture “demand” young men to to find a wife and get married? One way to opt out of marriage and condemnation for being gay, with your honor intact and that you do not have to reveal your preferences, is to go into priesthood.

Anders Lindström Apr 6, 2025, 2:07 PM
1 point
−3
in reply to: MondSemmel’s comment on: AI 2027: What Superintelligence Looks Like
Yes, sometimes they are slow, other times they are fast. A private effort to build a nuke or go to the moon in the time frames they did would not have been possible. AFAIK the assumption that Chinese AI development is government directed everyone agrees to, but for some very strange reason people like to think that US AI is directed by a group of quirky nerds that wants to save the world and just happens to get their hands on a MASSIVE amount of compute (worth billions upon billions of dollars). Imagine when the government gets to hear what these nerds are up to in a couple of years...

IF there is any truth to how important the race to AGI/ASI is to win.
THEN governments are the key-players in those races.

Anders Lindström Apr 4, 2025, 12:43 PM
12 points
−6
on: AI 2027: What Superintelligence Looks Like
News of the new models percolates slowly through the US government and beyond.
Well fleshed out scenario, but this kind of assumption is always a dealbreaker for me.
Why would the government not be aware of the development of the mightiest technology and weapon ever created if “we” are aware of it?
Could you please elaborate why you choose to go for the “stupid and uninformed government”, instead of the more plausible scenario where the government actually knows exactly what is going on in every step of the process and is the driving force behind it?

Anders Lindström Apr 3, 2025, 11:51 AM
−2 points
0
on: The Rise of Hyperpalatability
For the majority of human history we lived in a production market for food. We searched for that which tasted well but there was never enough to fill the void. Only the truly elite could afford to import enough food to reach the point of excess.
Humanity ~300.000 years. Agriculture ~12.000 years. We have been hunters and gathers for the vast majority of human history.

Anders Lindström Apr 1, 2025, 1:23 PM
1 point
0
on: Anders Lindström’s Shortform
Come for the game theory, stay for the slot machines...

Oh, April 1st.

Anders Lindström Mar 27, 2025, 9:48 PM
1 point
0
in reply to: Raemon’s comment on: Policy for LLM Writing on LessWrong
Yes, but as I wrote in the answer to habryka (see below), I am not talking about the present moment. I am concerned with the (near) future. With the break neck speed at which AI is moving it wont be long until it will be hopeless to figure out if its AI generated or not.

So my point and rhetorical question is this: AI is not going to go away. Everyone(!) will use it, all day every day. So instead of trying to come up with arbitrary formulas for how much AI generated content a post can or cannot contain, how can we use AI to the absolute limit to increase the quality of posts and make Lesswrong even better than it already is?!

Anders Lindström Mar 26, 2025, 9:25 PM
−1 points
−3
in reply to: habryka’s comment on: Policy for LLM Writing on LessWrong
I know the extremely hard work that a lot of people put into writing their posts, and that the moderators are doing a fantastic job at keeping the standards very high, all of which is much appreciated. Bravo!

But I assume that this policy change is forward looking and that is what I am talking about, the future. We are at the beginning of something truly spectacular that have already yielded results in certain domains that are nothing less than mind blowing. Text generation is one of those fields which have had extreme progress in just a few years time. If this progress continue (which is likely to assume), very soon text generation will be as good or better than the best human writers in pretty much any field.

How do you as moderators expect to keep up with this progress if you want to keep the forum “AI free”? Is there anything more concrete than a mere policy change that could be done to nudge people into NOT posting AI generated content? IMHO Lesswrong is a competition in cleaver ideas and smartness, and I think a fair assumption is that if you can get help from AI to reach “Yudkowsky-level” smartness, you will use it no matter what. Its just like when say athletes use PEDs to get an edge. Winning >> Policies