[-] lurker@awful.systems 2 points 4 hours ago

Can’t find the exact post rn but I remember an AI yt channel (im 90% sure it was the AISpecies guy) using this as proof that ASI is imminent, and conveniently left out the part at the end where they say this does not indicate that AI is now a general-purpose alignment scientist (and also left out the link to the sources in numerous posts iirc so no one could fact check him easily)

[-] lurker@awful.systems 8 points 22 hours ago

The myth that talking about bubbles prevents bubbles for when someone starts saying some “oh but everyone says AI is a bubble which must mean its not”

[-] lurker@awful.systems 3 points 1 day ago

REALLY? LMFAOOOOO

[-] lurker@awful.systems 5 points 1 day ago

Did it actually solve this one or did it just find a pre-existing solution like it did the last time?

[-] lurker@awful.systems 5 points 3 days ago

Another read (on substack) on the rising hatred of AI data centres and its political implications

[-] lurker@awful.systems 7 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Huh, interesting. Those slogans are also rather “interesting”

”we need better messengers”

Is he realising that showing up to a debate in a sparkly fedora and goggles is not going to make people take him seriously?

[-] lurker@awful.systems 7 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

The marketing mentions “a sprinkling of AI experts” even though Yud’s position on Twitter is that he is not an AI expert.

wait really? He actually said he's not an expert?

[-] lurker@awful.systems 14 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

AI CEOs Baffled by Hatred of Their Technology

"Why do people hate us so much? We only constantly say the technology we're making is dangerous and then block regulation, suck up resources, commit mass theft and plagiarism, threatened to destabilise the economy, enabled more CSAM, caused widespread mental health issues and multiple suicides, unleashed a barrage of slop, engaged in mass surveillance and mocked people against the tech? Don't they know AI is the future and will create a utopia where we all live in a simulation in space?"

[-] lurker@awful.systems 5 points 4 days ago

I'm curious to know the % of rationalist vs non-rationalist ratings for it

[-] lurker@awful.systems 5 points 4 days ago

I know. We can dream though

[-] lurker@awful.systems 8 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

This from a while ago but I forgot about it until today: Eliezer jumpscare in this interview about Absolute Scarecrow (its very brief but is there)

on the topic of EY's book, the ratings on Goodreads have slowly crept down (from 3.97 to 3.92)

and on the topic of ratings, the AI Doc has also gone down to an 6.9 on IMDB

87
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by lurker@awful.systems to c/techtakes@awful.systems
61

Originally posted in the Stubsack, but decided to make it its own post because why not

13
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by lurker@awful.systems to c/sneerclub@awful.systems

this was already posted on reddit sneerclub, but I decided to crosspost it here so you guys wouldn’t miss out on Yudkowsky calling himself a genre savy character, and him taking what appears to be a shot at the Zizzians

30
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by lurker@awful.systems to c/sneerclub@awful.systems

originally posted in the thread for sneers not worth a whole post, then I changed my mind and decided it is worth a whole post, cause it is pretty damn important

Posted on r/HPMOR roughly one day ago

full transcript:

Epstein asked to call during a fundraiser. My notes say that I tried to explain AI alignment principles and difficulty to him (presumably in the same way I always would) and that he did not seem to be getting it very much. Others at MIRI say (I do not remember myself / have not myself checked the records) that Epstein then offered MIRI $300K; which made it worth MIRI's while to figure out whether Epstein was an actual bad guy versus random witchhunted guy, and ask if there was a reasonable path to accepting his donations causing harm; and the upshot was that MIRI decided not to take donations from him. I think/recall that it did not seem worthwhile to do a whole diligence thing about this Epstein guy before we knew whether he was offering significant funding in the first place, and then he did, and then MIRI people looked further, and then (I am told) MIRI turned him down.

Epstein threw money at quite a lot of scientists and I expect a majority of them did not have a clue. It's not standard practice among nonprofits to run diligence on donors, and in fact I don't think it should be. Diligence is costly in executive attention, it is relatively rare that a major donor is using your acceptance of donations to get social cover for an island-based extortion operation, and this kind of scrutiny is more efficiently centralized by having professional law enforcement do it than by distributing it across thousands of nonprofits.

In 2009, MIRI (then SIAI) was a fiscal sponsor for an open-source project (that is, we extended our nonprofit status to the project, so they could accept donations on a tax-exempt basis, having determined ourselves that their purpose was a charitable one related to our mission) and they got $50K from Epstein. Nobody at SIAI noticed the name, and since it wasn't a donation aimed at SIAI itself, we did not run major-donor relations about it.

This reply has not been approved by MIRI / carefully fact-checked, it is just off the top of my own head.

34

I searched for “eugenics” on yud’s xcancel (i will never use twitter, fuck you elongated muskrat) because I was bored, got flashbanged by this gem. yud, genuinely what are you talking about

view more: next ›

lurker

joined 3 months ago