lfrymire

• lfrymireFeb 19, 2025, 12:38 AM

  1 point

  0

  on: Grad­ual Disem­pow­er­ment: Sys­temic Ex­is­ten­tial Risks from In­cre­men­tal AI Development

  Furthermore, without unprecedented changes in redistribution, declining labor share also translates into a structural decline in household consumption power, as humans lose their primary means of earning the income needed to participate in the economy as consumers.

  This holds only if the labor share of income shrinks faster than purchasing power grows. Overall, I still think the misaligned economy argument goes through if household consumption power grows in absolute terms but “human preference aligned dollars” shrinks as a fraction of total dollars spent.

• lfrymireApr 15, 2024, 2:50 PM

  3 points

  0

  on: The Best Tacit Knowl­edge Videos on Every Subject

  Domain: Piano

  Link: Seymour Bernstein Teaches Piano https://​​youtu.be/​​pRLBBJLX-dQ?si=-6EIvGDRyw0aJ0Sq

  Person: Seymour Bernstein

  Background: Pianist and composer, performed with the Chicago Symphony Orchestra, Adjunct Associate Professor of Music and Music Education at New York University.

  Why: Tonebase (a paid music learning service) recorded a number of free to watch conversations with Bernstein while he plays through or teaches a piece. Bernstein is about 90 years old at the time of recording and shares an incredible amount of tacit knowledge, especially about body mechanics when playing piano.

• lfrymireApr 5, 2023, 9:11 PM

  1 point

  0

  in reply to: Max H’s comment on: Best ar­gu­ments against in­stru­men­tal con­ver­gence?

  Re: specific claims to falsify, I generally buy the argument.

  If I had to pick out specific aspects which seem weaker, I think they would mostly be related to our confusion around agent foundations. It isn’t trivially obvious to me that the way we describe “intelligence” or “goals” within the instrumental convergence argument is a good match for the way current systems operate (though it seems close enough, and we shouldn’t expect to be wrong in a way that makes the situation better).

• lfrymireApr 5, 2023, 9:01 PM

  1 point

  0

  in reply to: Max H’s comment on: Best ar­gu­ments against in­stru­men­tal con­ver­gence?

  I would agree that instrumental convergence is probably not a necessary component of AI x-risk, so you’re correct that “crux” is a bit of a misnomer.

  However, in my experience it is one of the primary arguments people rely on when explaining their concerns to others. The correlation between credence in instrumental convergence and AI x-risk concern seems very high. IMO it is also one of the most concerning legs of the overall argument.

  If somebody made a compelling case that we should not expect instrumental convergence by default in the current ML paradigm, I think the overall argument for x-risk would have to look fairly different from the one that is usually put forward.

[Question] Best ar­gu­ments against in­stru­men­tal con­ver­gence?