Oh, yes, I’ve agreed with you about that for a long time. The grandparent comment wasn’t actually my (only) reminder.
VNKKET
Speaking of copies, I keep meaning to write a LOCKSS plugin for LessWrong. This comment will be my note-to-self, or anyone else who wants to do it first.
(interested in hearing how other donors frame allocation between SI and CFAR)
I still only donate to SI. It’s great that we can supposedly aim the money at FAI now, due to the pivot towards research.
But I would also love to see EY’s appeal to MoR readers succeed:
I don’t work for the Center for Applied Rationality and they don’t pay me, but their work is sufficiently important that the Singularity Institute (which does pay me) has allowed me to offer to work on Methods full-time until the story is finished if HPMOR readers donate a total of $1M to CFAR.
Upvoted for explaining how polls work.
And after skimming the paper, the only thing I could find in response to your point is:
Coercion detection. Since our aim is to prevent users from effectively transmitting the ability to authenticate to others, there remains an attack where an adversary coerces a user to authenticate while they are under adversary control. It is possible to reduce the effectiveness of this technique if the system could detect if the user is under duress. Some behaviors such as timed responses to stimuli may detectably change when the user is under duress. Alternately, we might imagine other modes of detection of duress, including video monitoring, voice stress detection, and skin conductance monitoring [8, 16, 1]. The idea here would be to detect by out-of-band techniques the effects of coercion. Together with in-band detection of altered performance, we may be able to reliably detect coerced users.
How easily could the SI lose important data (like unpublished research) in, say, a fire or computer malfunction?
Thank you! And I just gave $200 to SI on top of the $50/month they automatically get from me.
In FAQ #6:
Friendly AI is a problem of cognitive science.
I think this un-argued-for assertion makes the site seem (and be) less rigorous. Unfortunately, I can’t think of a better concise justification for why FAI researchers should read about cognitive science.
Nice!
From FAQ #5:
Independent researchers associated with the Singularity Institute: Daniel Dewey, Kaj Sotala, Peter de Blanc, Joshua Fox, Steve Rayhawk, and others
Would it be feasible to make this list exhaustive so that you can delete the “and others”? I think the “and others” makes the site seem less prestigious.
Good question. And for people who missed it, this refers to money that was reported stolen on SI’s tax documents a few years ago. (relevant thread)
You got me reading that chapter.
Is this comment supposed to be pleasant or unpleasant?
Edit: I asked because “have a good day, thank you for posting” is often used to mean “shut up”, but now that I’ve looked at your past comments, I assume you’re being friendly.
How much payment are you offering for how much work?
Of the things on your list, I’m most surprised by cognitive science and maybe game theory, unless you’re talking about the fields’ current insights rather than their expected future insights. In that case, I’m still somewhat surprised game theory is on this list. I’d love to learn what led you to this belief.
It’s possible I only know the basics, so feel free to say “read more about what the fields actually offer and it’ll be obvious if you’ve been on Less Wrong long enough.”
I know the pain of being someone who has had sex before, and then being reminded of how awesome sex is without having an outlet for it at the time, and having it leave me feeling unbelievably miserable. I didn’t want to leave even a single person reading my article in a place like that.
This thought is very much appreciated.
Because of this, I set up a $50/month pledge (instead of a one-time donation of $500), and I hope this drive causes lots of people to do the same.
If you’re interested in how your body works, I recommend Gerald Cizadlo’s lectures. They are biology classes for nursing students at an American religious college. Because of his pathophysiology and physiology podcasts, I’m now able to explain the way nerves transmit signals (for example).
(Edited; I originally called nerves insane.)
Nice! And for anyone freaked out by the “current balance of my bank account” part, there’s an explanation here.
Is the Singularity Institute supporting her through your salary?
I hope you’re not too put out by the rudeness of this question. I’ve decided that I’m allowed to ask because I’m a (small) donor. I doubt your answer will jeopardize my future donations, whatever it is, but I do have preferences about this.
(Also, it’s very good to hear that you’re taking health seriously! Not that I expected otherwise.)
I’m guessing RobertLumley’s “Why would you downvote a meetup post?” caused people to upvote. I know I like to upvote when someone points out unnecessary-seeming downvotes.