MichaelVassar comments on Less Wrong Q&A with Eliezer Yudkowsky: Ask Your Questions - Less Wrong

16 Post author: MichaelGR 11 November 2009 03:00AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (682)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: komponisto 11 November 2009 05:39:28AM 33 points [-]

During a panel discussion at the most recent Singularity Summit, Eliezer speculated that he might have ended up as a science fiction author, but then quickly added:

I have to remind myself that it's not what's the most fun to do, it's not even what you have talent to do, it's what you need to do that you ought to be doing.

Shortly thereafter, Peter Thiel expressed a wish that all the people currently working on string theory would shift their attention to AI or aging; no disagreement was heard from anyone present.

I would therefore like to ask Eliezer whether he in fact believes that the only two legitimate occupations for an intelligent person in our current world are (1) working directly on Singularity-related issues, and (2) making as much money as possible on Wall Street in order to donate all but minimal living expenses to SIAI/Methuselah/whatever.

How much of existing art and science would he have been willing to sacrifice so that those who created it could instead have been working on Friendly AI? If it be replied that the work of, say, Newton or Darwin was essential in getting us to our current perspective wherein we have a hope of intelligently tackling this problem, might the same not hold true in yet unknown ways for string theorists? And what of Michelangelo, Beethoven, and indeed science fiction? Aren't we allowed to have similar fun today? For a living, even?

Comment author: MichaelVassar 13 November 2009 05:18:29AM 7 points [-]

It's a free country. You are allowed to do a lot, but it can only be optimal to do one thing.

Comment author: komponisto 14 November 2009 07:58:31AM *  4 points [-]

Not necessarily; the maximum value of a function may be attained at more than one point of its domain.

(Also, my use of the word "allowed" is clearly rhetorical/figurative. Obviously it's not illegal to work on things other than AI, and I don't interpret you folks as saying it should be.)

Comment author: MichaelVassar 15 November 2009 04:41:33PM 3 points [-]

Point taken. Also, of course, given a variety of human personalities and situations, the optimal activity for a given person can vary quite a bit. I never advocate asceticism.