A bit odd to start out throwing shade at the Segway considering that the concept has been somewhat redeemed with e-bikes and e-scooters.

LLMs and humans are both sentence-producing machines, but they were shaped by different processes to do different work

Except not really. We're not sentence-producing machines, we're "machines" (so to speak) that can produce sentences. Not the same thing.

Once this is in place, they say, nations must be prepared to enforce these restrictions by bombing unregistered data centres, even if this risks nuclear war, “because datacenters can kill more people than nuclear weapons” (emphasis theirs).

So the plan is still to kill everyone to death to prevent GPT-~~5~~ ~~6~~ ~~7~~ ~~8~~ ...

So, you know Ross Scott, the Stop Killing Games guy?
About 2 years ago he actually interviewed Yudkowsky. The context being that Ross discussed his article on one of his monthly streams, and expressed skepticism that there was any threat at all from AI. Yudkowsky got wind of his skepticism, and reached out to Ross to do a discussion with him about the topic. He also requested that Ross not do any research on him.
And here it is...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxsAuxswOvM

I can't say I actually recommend watching it, because Yudkowsky spends the first 40 minutes of the discussion refusing to answer the question "So what is GPT-4, anyway?" (It's not exactly that question, but it's pretty close).
I don't know what they discussed afterwards because I stopped watching it after that, but, well, it's a thing that exists.

Also if you're worried about digital clone's being tortured, you could just... not build it. Like, it can't hurt you if it never exists.

Imagine that conversation:
"What did you do over the weekend?"
"Built an omnicidal AI that scours the internet and creates digital copies of people based on their posting history and whatnot and tortures billions of them at once. Just the ones who didn't help me build the omnicidal AI, though."
"WTF why."
"Because if I didn't the omnicidal AI that only exists because I made it would create a billion digital copies of me and torture them for all eternity!"

Like, I'd get it more if it was a "We accidentally made an omnicidal AI" thing, but this is supposed to be a very deliberate action taken by humanity to ensure the creation of an AI designed to torture digital beings based on real people in the specific hopes that it also doesn't torture digital beings based on them.

"Fund my company and your child might live to adulthood and/or have sperm that glows green."

One thing he failed to mention here is that all software fails eventually. So imagine one of those fancy graphics scenes he commissioned being a 100+ car pileup because a software glitch caused a car to make a sudden right-hand turn to a street that doesn't exist.

This wasn't a free win, however. The reason Harris took over in the first place was because Biden's performance in the debate was poor enough that the Democrats thought there was no longer any chance with him, and this was already with lowering approval ratings. Had he stayed, I bet Trump's victory would have been even wider.

Awful.systems defaults to dark mode.

Investors demand growth. The problem is that Microsoft has basically won Capitalism and has no real area to grow to.

K

Obligatory note that, speaking as a rationalist-tribe member, to a first approximation nobody in the community is actually interested in the Basilisk and hasn’t been for at least a decade.

Sure, but that doesn't change that the head EA guy wrote an OP-Ed for Time magazine that a nuclear holocaust is preferable to a world that has GPT-5 in it.

Probably would have been easier when the context window wasn't 128k.

Though what the point would be should someone actually achieve that eludes me a bit.