= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
RobinHanson comments on Preface to a Proposal for a New Mode of Inquiry - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (83)
But in the above you explicitly choose to exclude AGI researchers. Now you also want to exclude those who haven't read a lot about AGI? Seems like you are trying to exclude as irrelevant everyone who isn't an AGI amateur like you.
I guess it depends where exactly you set the threshold. Require too much knowledge and the pool of opinions, and the diversity of the sources of those opinions, will be too small (ie, just "AGI ameteurs"). On the other hand, the minimum amount of research required to properly understand the AGI issue is substantial, and if someone demonstrates a serious lack of understanding, such as claiming that AI will never be able to do something that narrow AIs can do already, then I have no problem excluding their opinion.