24
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2025
24 points (100.0% liked)
TechTakes
2129 readers
77 users here now
Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.
This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.
For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Apparently Eliezer is actually against throwing around P(doom) numbers: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/4mBaixwf4k8jk7fG4/yudkowsky-on-don-t-use-p-doom ?
The objections to using P(doom) are relatively reasonable by lesswrong standards... but this is in fact once again all Eliezer's fault. He started a community centered around 1) putting overconfident probability "estimates" on subjective uncertain things 2) need to make a friendly AI-God, he really shouldn't be surprised that people combine the two. Also, he has regularly expressed his certainty that we are all going to die to Skynet in terms of ridiculously overconfident probabilities, he shouldn't be surprised that other people followed suit.
There's a part where they quote someone saying "I am not particularly confident [in my p(doom)]" and I'm still remembering getting talked down to about how Actually all subjective uncertainty can be represented as probabilities because Bayesianism and you wouldn't happen to be one of those stupid frequentists right?