NumberWangMan

10 ms·

1.
by NumberWangMan 1y ago
I have thought about whether banning advertising would be a good idea prior to stumbling onto this article. I'm not saying there would be no downsides, but I think there would be a TON of benefits as well. Consider that advertising is
2.
by NumberWangMan 2y ago
I think the whole problem with externalities is that even if everyone gains a private benefit from their choice, you can all be worse off due to the externalities. To take your example, if you have a society of 30 people, each of whom drive
3.
by NumberWangMan 2y ago
I believe that if you're doing some heavy chopping, that orientation keeps the cutting board in good condition for the longest time, as you're not cutting through the wood grain and taking chunks out of the board. Separately I&#x2
4.
by NumberWangMan 2y ago
My intuition, based on what I know of economics, is that a UBI policy would have results something like the following: * Inflation, things get more expensive. People attempt to consume more, especially people with low income. * People can&
5.
by NumberWangMan 2y ago
I agree that all regulation is written in blood. But at the same time, regulation can result in bleeding, and we don't always carefully weigh the costs and benefits of regulation. There may be a law that saves 100 lives a year, but
6.
by NumberWangMan 2y ago
I don't think that the scientific consensus on nutrition as unsettled as you say. As an example, there are a lot of people making money selling various diets as well as promoting uncertainty and doubt around the issue, but there seems
7.
by NumberWangMan 2y ago
Sure, but you still have to balance your "who benefits" against the harm of the thing they're proposing to ban. In the case of these models, you can fine-tune the model all you want to be moral and not do harmful things like
8.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
I've heard it said that paying public servants well is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for avoiding corruption (this was as applied to Singapore). You don't want people trading power for money, and when you consider ho
9.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
> how development of an unpredictable technology might pan out > how one decision would pan out I'm not sure what point you are making here. Are you trying to say "see, the AI not-kill-everyone-ists couldn't predict th
10.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
Everyone is better off if children don’t work, but if everyone else has their children work and you don’t, you lose. Sounds like moloch! (I’m ignoring corporate profits and consumer prices for simplicity-but I think most of us would be hap
11.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
I would say...not necessarily. The technology that lets someone create a gun does not give the ability to make bulletproof armor or the ability to treat life-threatening gunshot wounds. Or take nerve gases, as another example. It's
12.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
The trick is to once every couple of days when it's starting to get to that point where it'll go bad soon, take it out, and re-cook it somehow to kill any bacteria. This could be tossing soup back on the stove, or microwaving veg
13.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
Zvi Mowshowitz has a nuanced viewpoint I like -- we should be very careful and move very slowly with any tech that has a chance of wiping out humanity, and embrace the "move fast and break things" attitude with everything else, e.
14.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
We need more people to say this out loud, so thank you…
15.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
There absolutely could be (profit I mean), if we taxed fossil fuels enough.
16.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
It’s multipolar trap/ coordination problem. The costs of carbon emissions are diffuse and borne by everyone, while the costs of changing your behavior are mostly borne by you. It’s just a sad fact of life, and to solve it the only fe
17.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
This is the best argument I've heard against billionaires--one I had never heard before: https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/billionaires-surplus-and-re... . I think most arguments for/against the existence of pe
18.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
This is called a multipolar trap. “If I don’t build it, someone else will, so I might as well cash in”
19.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
It is for now, but rest assured that people will be working very hard on fixing that problem. I don’t doubt they will succeed.
20.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
Yep, and that’s rather terrifying, is it not? Is there any good reason to assume that future AGI will share our sense of morality, once it is smart enough to surpass human thought?
21.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
The only way AIs won’t reach the point of being better than humans is if we intentionally stop, I fear. Once an AI is trained, you can copy it a million times over. A human takes many years to learn a skill to the point of mastery.
22.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
Surely there are limits. But it matters a LOT how far away they are. Anyone betting on humanity hitting limits to its exponential growth would have been unpleasantly surprised many times. And if you talk about how much we're changin
23.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
> If you step way back, the simple fact that the Earth still exists in its current form tells us that no recursive process in the multi-billion-year history of the planet has ever spiraled completely out of control; some limit has always
24.
AI#28: Watching and Waiting(thezvi.wordpress.com)
1 points by NumberWangMan 3y ago|0 comments
25.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
This is also, I believe, why so many are cavalier about the difficulty of avoiding catastrophic outcomes after inventing general artificial intelligence. We are really good at lying to ourselves. I fear this will be the last time.
26.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
Yep. Pets, or just one of many biological species that go extinct as more and more resources are taken up by AGIs doing what they want to do, remaking the planet to be more suitable for themselves and not terribly caring if it becomes less
27.
Zvi Mowshowitz on AI and the Dial of Progress(econtalk.org)
1 points by NumberWangMan 3y ago|0 comments
28.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
I think there’s going to be a point where we need to slow a AI way, way down in order to avoid bad outcomes. I’m with Zvi Mowshowitz here: we should encourage progress and risk taking in every area except those where there are extinction r
29.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
There's a part of me that feels the urge to prepare for disaster. And yet I know it's a reaction to fears I have that won't be helped by being prepared. My main concern is that one of many possible AGI disasters will come t
30.
by NumberWangMan 3y ago
I don't know. I don't think anyone is directly programming GPT-4 to behave in any way, they're just training it to give the responses they want, and it learns. Something inside it seems to be figuring out some way of repres

More ›