Eliezer is arguing about one view of the Singularity, though there are others. This is one reason I thought to include http://yudkowsky.net/singularity/schools on the wiki. If leaders/proponents of the other two schools could acknowledge this model Eliezer has described of there being three schools of the Singularity, I think that might lend it more authority as you are describing.
righteousreason
Karma: 29
I found the two SIAI introductory pages very compelling the first time I read them. This was back before I knew what SIAI or the Singularity really was, as soon as I read through those I just had to find out more.
I thought similarly about LOGI part 3 (Seed AI). I actually thought of that immediately and put a link up to that on the wiki page.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=195959
“Oh, dear. Now I feel obliged to say something, but all the original reasons against discussing the AI-Box experiment are still in force...
All right, this much of a hint:
There’s no super-clever special trick to it. I just did it the hard way.
Something of an entrepreneurial lesson there, I guess.”
Well I wasn’t really going overboard with praise. This is the best book ever written, as far as I know. This is an awesome thread, as I would love to find something that can outclass Atlas Shrugged.
For now though, it is by far the best book ever written. Many people agree- and not just the cultish fanatics. I’ve had many instances where random everyday people express exactly the same sentiment, at book stores, etc.
Really?
I mean come on, that’s a cheap, weak analogy. I haven’t finished yet but I’m compiling all of the good quotes from Atlas Shrugged. The book is full of these awesome quotes and truths that are portable to many other subjects of rationality.
It is far more real and relevant than you are giving it credit for.
what the hell?
What does the cultish behavior of followers have to do with the actual content? Affective death spirals can characterize virtually any group. Idiots and crazies are everywhere.
Why is this so down rated??
I realize that you didn’t vote it down, but using this logic to vote it down would be something like a reverse affective death spiral- you let the visibly obvious ADS cast a negative halo on the entire philosophy, and thus become irrationally biased against the legitimate value in the center of the ADS that got blown up by the over-zealous crazies and idiots.
Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand.
The greatest book yet written, Atlas Shrugged is a foundational text of the philosophy of life, reason, and reality. It is dedicated to those who want to “win” and “do the right thing” in general.
The book’s philosophy is expressed in a deep, self-consistent context, and the rationalist reader will find that much of the material is consistent with many other things rationalists will read in completely different subjects along their journey.
It is a book all about rationality, in the LW sense of “rationality”, and the antithesis philosophies thereof, and it draws the logical conclusions of these opposing philosophies out in the full context of the world at large through a terrific story.
This book is a classic. If you are a rationalist, you would be crazy to ignore it if you haven’t read it yet.
==Re comments on “Singularity Paper”== Re comments, I had been given to understand that the point of the page was to summarize and cite Eliezer’s arguments for the audience of ″Minds and Machines″. Do you think this was just a bad idea from the start? (That’s a serious question; it might very well be.) Or do you think the endeavor is a good one, but the writing on the page is just lame? --User:Zack M. Davis 20:19, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
(this is about my opinion on the writing in the wiki page)
No, just use his writing as much as possible- directly in the text of the paper. Whole articles/posts in sequence for the whole paper would be best, or try to copy-paste together some of the key points of a series of articles/posts (but do you really want to do that and leave out the rich, coherent, consistent explanation that these points are surrounded in?)
My comments may seem to imply that we would essentially be putting together a book. That would be an AWESOME book… we could call it “Intelligence Explosion”.
If someone ended up doing a book like that, they might as well include a section on FAI. If SIAI produces a relevant FAI paper, that could be included (or merged) into the FAI section
SEE THIS:
http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=35318&hl=