5 ms·
I found the "basilisk collection" (at the bottom of "bottom of the iceberg") the most fascinating one . I have the feeling that the whole iceberg only exists f
by InsOp 5y ago
I found the "basilisk collection" (at the bottom of "bottom of the iceberg") the most fascinating one .
I have the feeling that the whole iceberg only exists for us to click on this very article (as both share the same domain)
- wayvey 5y agoWow, I went to read the article and completely forgot you said "same domain". I was fooled for a while and couldn't believe I'd never heard of it before. Very facinating indeed. It'd be pretty wild if that stuff was real :)
- simias 5y agoIt took me a while to understand that it was fiction too. I spent a few minutes anxiously pondering if I could somehow have overlooked one of the most important cryptographic event in decades. It's very well made.
- DaiPlusPlus 5y agoBefore I read the SCP-like article, I thought it might be a reference to Roko’s Basilisk: an unrelated, but equally unsettling, proposition.
- fanf2 5y agoRoko’s Basilisk is just the same as Pascal’s Wager.
- ralfd 5y agoThe twist of Rokos Basilisk is that it is an info hazard: it only is dangerous if one knows about it. Like a dark cult of Cthulhu who only conjures the elder god so they have the mercy to be eaten first. I think it is silly, but there are people anxious about it, which is not true about Pascals Wager.
- DaiPlusPlus 5y ago> I think it is silly, but there are people anxious about it, which is not true about Pascals Wager. There's reason to be anxious about Pascal's Wager: assuming one holds a charitable view of the historicity of religious texts then Pascal's Wager is very rational - but one might feel social pressure to not be religious - or more likely: social pressure to hold a particular religion) - and just procrastination to get-around-to-researching-this-whole-religion-thing, so the uncertainty and lack of confidence in ones' own actions can lead to anxiety like that.
- YeGoblynQueenne 5y ago>> The twist of Rokos Basilisk is that it is an info hazard: it only is dangerous if one knows about it. Actually, it's only dangerous if one believes in it. Which is why it can't really work: a superintelligent AI would assume nobody is gullible enough to actually believe it, like, for real.
- lifthrasiir 5y agoSam Hughes' recent work [1] has the roughly same concept, a fictional Wikipedia article with enough details to believe. I enjoyed both. [1] https://qntm.org/mmacevedo https://qntm.org/mmacevedo