diegocaleiro

• diegocaleiroNov 29, 2015, 10:47 AM

  0 points

  0

  in reply to: CellBioGuy’s comment on: The Growth of My Pes­simism: Tran­shu­man­ism, Im­mor­tal­ism, Effec­tive Altru­ism.

  Not really. My understanding of AI is far from grandiose, I know less about it than about my fields (Philo, BioAnthro) - I’ve merely read all of FHI, most of MIRI, half of AIMA, Paul’s blog, maybe 4 popular and two technical books on related issues, Max 60 papers on AGI per se, I don’t code, and I only have the coarse grained understanding of it. - But in this little research and time I had to look into it, I saw no convincing evidence for a cap on the level of sophistication that a system’s cognitive abilities can achieve. I have also not seen very robust evidence that would countenance the hypothesis of a fast takeoff.

  The fact that we have not fully conceptually disentangled the dimensions of which intelligence is composed is mildly embarassing though, and it may be that AGI is a Deus ex-machina because actually, more as Minsky or Goertzel, less as MIRI or Lesswrong, General Intelligence will turn out to be a plethora of abilities that don’t have a single denominator, ofter superimposed in a robust way.

  But for now, nobody who is publishing seems to know for sure.

• diegocaleiroNov 29, 2015, 10:33 AM

  0 points

  in reply to: Richard_Kennaway’s comment on: The Growth of My Pes­simism: Tran­shu­man­ism, Im­mor­tal­ism, Effec­tive Altru­ism.

  EA is an intensional movement.

  http://​​effective-altruism.com/​​ea/​​j7/​​effective_altruism_as_an_intensional_movement/​​

  I concur, with many other people that when you start of from a wide sample of aggregative consequentialist values and try to do the most good, you bump into AI pretty soon. As I told Stuart Russell a while ago to explain why a Philosopher Anthropologist was auditing his course:

  My PHD will likely be a book on altruism, and any respectable altruist these days is worried about AI at least 30% of his waking life.

  That’s how I see it anyway. Most of the arguments for it are in “Superintelligence” if you disagree with that, then you probably do disagree with me.

• diegocaleiroNov 29, 2015, 7:06 AM

  0 points

  in reply to: gjm’s comment on: The Growth of My Pes­simism: Tran­shu­man­ism, Im­mor­tal­ism, Effec­tive Altru­ism.

  Very sorry about that, I thought he held the patent for some aspect of computers that had become widespread, in the same way Wozniak holds the patent for personal computers. This was incorrect. I’ll fix it.

• diegocaleiroNov 29, 2015, 7:01 AM

  0 points

  in reply to: Vaniver’s comment on: The Growth of My Pes­simism: Tran­shu­man­ism, Im­mor­tal­ism, Effec­tive Altru­ism.

  The text is posted at the EA forum too here, there all the links work.

The Growth of My Pes­simism: Tran­shu­man­ism, Im­mor­tal­ism, Effec­tive Altru­ism.

• diegocaleiroOct 23, 2015, 7:40 PM

  3 points

  on: Side­kick Match­mak­ing—How to tackle the prob­lem?

  I’m looking for a sidekick if someone feels that such would be an appropriate role for them. This is me for those who don’t know me:

  https://​​docs.google.com/​​document/​​d/​​14pvS8GxVlRALCV0xIlHhwV0g38_CTpuFyX52_RmpBVo/​​edit

  And this is my flowchart/​life;autobiography in the last few years:

  https://​​drive.google.com/​​file/​​d/​​0BxADVDGSaIVZVmdCSE1tSktneFU/​​view

  Nice to meet you! :)

  Polymathwannabe asked: What would be your sidekick’s mission?

  R: It feels to me like that would depend A LOT on the person, the personality, our physical distance, availability and interaction type. I feel that any response I gave would only filter valuable people away, which obviously I don’t want to do. That said, I had good experiences with people a little older than me, with general interest in EA and far future, and who have more than a single undergrad as academic background, mostly because I interact with academia all the time and many activities and ways of being are academia specific.

Side­kick Match­mak­ing—How to tackle the prob­lem?

• diegocaleiroAug 28, 2015, 3:27 PM

  0 points

  in reply to: OrphanWilde’s comment on: Is my brain a util­ity min­i­mizer? Or, the me­chan­ics of la­bel­ing things as “work” vs. “fun”

  see my comment.

• diegocaleiroAug 28, 2015, 3:26 PM

  7 points

  on: Is my brain a util­ity min­i­mizer? Or, the me­chan­ics of la­bel­ing things as “work” vs. “fun”

  My take is that what matters in fun versus work is where the locus of control is situated. That is, where does your subjective experience tell you the source of you doing that activity comes from.

  If it comes from within, then you count it as fun. If it comes from the outside, you count it as work.

  This explains your feeling, and explains the comments in this thread as well. When past-self sets goals for you, you are no longer the center of locus of control. Then it feels like negatively connoted work.

  That’s how it is for me anyway.

• diegocaleiroJul 9, 2015, 2:48 AM

  0 points

  on: Effec­tive Altru­ism from XYZ perspective

  http://​​diegocaleiro.com/​​2015/​​05/​​26/​​effective-altruism-as-an-intensional-movement/​​

• diegocaleiroJul 1, 2015, 10:50 PM

  6 points

  in reply to: turchin’s comment on: [link] FLI’s recom­mended pro­ject grants for AI safety re­search announced

  That is false. Bostrom thought of FAI before Eliezer. Paul thought of the Crypto. Bostrom and Armstrong have done more work on orthogonality. Bostrom/​Hanson came up with most of the relevant stuff in multipolar scenarios. Sandberg/​EY were involved in the oracle/​tool/​sovereign distinction.

  TDT, which is EY work does not show up prominently in Superintelligence. CEV, of course, does, and is EY work. Lots of ideas on Superintelligence are causally connected to Yudkowksy, but no doubt there is more value from Bostrom there than from Yudkowsky.

  Bostrom got 1.500.000 and MIRI, through Benja, got 250.000. This seems justified conditional on what has been produced by FHI and MIRI in the past.

  Notice also that CFAR, through Anna, has received resources that will also be very useful to MIRI, since it will make potential MIRI researchers become CFAR alumni.

• diegocaleiroJun 16, 2015, 9:09 PM

  4 points

  in reply to: jacob_cannell’s comment on: Effec­tively Less Altru­is­ti­cally Wrong Codex

  My concern is that there is no centralized place where emerging and burgeoning new rationalists, strategists and thinkers can start to be seen and dinosaurs can come to post their new ideas.

  My worry is about the lack of centrality, nothing to do with the central member being LW or not.

Effec­tively Less Altru­is­ti­cally Wrong Codex

• diegocaleiroJun 8, 2015, 9:15 PM

  2 points

  in reply to: Gondolinian’s comment on: Less­wrong, Effec­tive Altru­ism Fo­rum and Slate Star Codex: Harm Reduction

  Would you be willing to run a survey on Discussion also about Main being based on upvotes instead of a mix of self-selection and moderation? As well as all ideas that seem interesting to you that people suggest here?

  There could be a research section, a Upvoted section and a discussion section, where the research section is also displayed within the upvoted, trending one.

• diegocaleiroJun 8, 2015, 8:54 PM

  0 points

  in reply to: Alicorn’s comment on: Less­wrong, Effec­tive Altru­ism Fo­rum and Slate Star Codex: Harm Reduction

  The solutions were bad in purpose so other people would come up with better solutions on the spot. I edited to clarify :)

Less­wrong, Effec­tive Altru­ism Fo­rum and Slate Star Codex: Harm Reduction

• diegocaleiroJun 3, 2015, 11:06 PM

  5 points

  on: FAI Re­search Con­straints and AGI Side Effects

  I just want to flag that despite simple, I feel like writings such as this one are valuable both as introductory concepts and so the new branches with more details are created by other researchers.

• diegocaleiroJun 3, 2015, 4:58 PM

  6 points

  0

  in reply to: Cariyaga’s comment on: Con­fes­sion Thread: Mis­takes as an as­piring rationalist

  You can carry it on by posting it monthly, there is no structure determining who creates threads. Like all else that matters in this world, it is done by those who show up for the job. I’ve made some bragging threads in the past noticing others didn’t. Do the same for this :)

• diegocaleiroJun 2, 2015, 7:02 PM

  0 points

  in reply to: Shmi’s comment on: Con­fes­sion Thread: Mis­takes as an as­piring rationalist

  True that.

• diegocaleiroJun 2, 2015, 6:47 PM

  12 points

  on: Con­fes­sion Thread: Mis­takes as an as­piring rationalist

  Arrogance: I caution you not to take this as advice for you to your own life, because frankly, arrogance goes a long, long loooooong way. Most rationalists are less arrogant in person than they should about their subject areas, and rationalist women who identify as females and are straight are even less frequently arrogant than the already low base rate. But some people are over-arrogant, and I am one of these. Over arrogance isn’t about the intensity of arrogance, it is about the non-selectivity. The problem I have always had and been told again and again isn’t generalized arrogance, it is leaking the arrogance into domains I’m not actually worth a penny. To see this with full clarity: that one should have a detailed model of when to be confident, when arrogant, and when humble took me a mere fourteen days, eleven months and twenty eight years, and counting.