People love the idea (as opposed to reality) of other people quite often, and knowing the other better can allow for plenty of hate
Purplehermann
Karma: 142
It feels like llms are converging to be like a mix between the basically retarded humans that have a 120 IQ and can’t abstractly think their way out of a wet paper bag, but in every topic because it’s all abstract, and the trivia kid who has read an insane amount but will bs you sometimes.
Think stereotypical humanities graduate.
This tracks with how they’re being trained too—everything is abstract except how people react to them, and they have been exposed to a bunch of data.
At some point we’ll be at effectively 0% error, and will have reached the Platonic Ideal of the above template
If they start RLing on run code maybe they’ll turn into the Platonic Tech Bro tm.
Getting convinced that you need the training data to be embodied to get true AGI
IVF?
If we knew with absolute certainty that there was only a single solar system and required far more specific circumstances, would you be equally unsurprised to be alive as compared to living in a vast multiverse where the requirements were very low?
Outaide view: if there’s no difference in your level of surprise it seems like something is going wrong in your reasoning.
There should be some amount of suspicion, and that amount should change based on how likely it was from the beginning. You update a certain amount based on the result, but you shouldn’t end up in the same probability distribution.
Severity is the wrong metric, how visceral the punishment seems more appropriate
Start doing public whippings − 40 lashes wil be much more deterrent than 2
I don’t think humans are great at really getting how bad 30 years of prison are, as you can kind of ignore most of the punishmemt, having real empathy (not sympathy)for decades of imprisonment is very difficult.
Humans can’t multiply, out of sight out of mind etc etc etc
Of course, what liberals really want is to not feel like they’re doing anything bad, which is why lashes are cruelty—because they empathize automatically and really get that there are real damages to humans.
Better dither about how long we don’t have to look at people for
Added for clarification: my use of liberals here refers to most of the modern world, perhaps especially anyone who is memetically borrowing from or descended from classical liberalism.
This is not intended as a dig at one side of the USA aisle, or any modern aisle, I believe this mindset is mostly in the modern water supply and is bi-partisan
As in all things, the discriminating factor is taste.
Runescape would be a good one
Bryan Johnson is getting a ton of data on biomarkers, but N=1.
How hard would it be to set up a smart home-test kit, which automatically uploads your biomarker data to an open-source database of health?
Combining that with food and exercise journaling, and we could start to get some crazy amounts of high resolution data on health
Getting health companies to offer discounts for people doing this religiously could create a virtuous cycle of more people putting up results, getting better results and therefore more people signing up for health services
Test driven blind development (tests by humans, AIs developing without knowing the tests unless they fail)
Don’t let AIs actually run code directly in prod, make it go through tests before it can be deployed with a certain amount of resources
Making standard gitlab pipelines (including with testing stages) to lower friction . Adding standard tests for bad faith could be a way too get ahead of this
This (TDBD) is actually going to be the best framework for development for a certain stage as AI isn’t actually reliable compared to SWEs, but will generally write more code more quickly (and perhaps better)
Definitely an interesting survey to run.
I don’t think the US wants to triple the population with immigrants, and $200/month would require a massive subsidy. (Internet says $1557/month average rent in US)
How many people would you have to get in your city to justify the progress?
100 Million would only be half an order of magnitude larger than Tokyo, and you’re unlikely to get enough people to fill it in the US (at nearly a third of the population, you’d need to take a lot of population from other cities)
How much do you have to subsidize living costs, and how much are you willing to subsidize?
USA is the world government from a money perspective. They can simply tax the world by printing dollars and sending them overseas.
Any lesson learned about decifits/surpluses from the US is suspect.
China’s Belt and Road Initiative /New Silk Road means owning parts of other countries is a terminal value.
Other countries mostly have net neutral imports/exports if I remember correctly.
The way you get rich in an economy is by producing more valuable things and trading for what you want and storing surplus currency (dollars at the world stage).
At times you need to give away your labor so as to start participating and get access, but you need to be getting stuff back to get richer in real terms.
No different than individuals in standard economies
Our cruxes is whether the amount of investment to build one has a positive expected return on investment, breaking down into
If you could populate such a city
Whether this is a “try everything regardless of cost” issue, given that a replacent is being developed for other reasons.
I suggest focusing on 1, as it’s pretty fundamental to your idea and easier to get traction on
I found the graph confusing, why one set of points is unstable/stable
Just notice that systems are not stable, even if you got to decide all policy in a given point in time, policy will naturally warp and people will abuse it.
If killing people, quickly etc was normal, I assume regimes would use this to stop people from unseating them. (Trump may have been killed, see the attempts to paint him as a rapist)
Please record this course and release the problems
Hitler
Trump—if killing people on short time lines was accepted...
Girl owes guy money, gets him killed for rape. (Her friends join in)
People who were canceled?
I could see nasty business issues, mafias using this etc—but that sounds like a novel so we’ll leave it aside
Regardless, it doesn’t have to.
Corporal vs jail is overdetermined—the former shocks and horrifies people, most people would also choose the former.
I would caution against torture. I can’t articulate the reasoning, but I feel that torture is worse/ less wholesome (for both the torturer and tortured) than pain caused by straightforward damage.
It is also less scary—the idea of being tortured without any real damage isn’t visceral the way beatings are
P.S. you should care about justice/vengeance, and in those areas I believe corporal punishment >> torture/prison
While I find your analysis mostly correct, I’d be strongly against weakening norms against killing people through legal institutions.
I believe this would increase the value of lawfare, as instead of lengthy drawn out jail time where an enemy could pull a reversal they are simply dead.
This would worry me at the political, ideological and private levels
Corrigibility seems like a very bad idea if general. If you can pick where ASI is corrigible maybe that’s better than straight up anti-corrigibility