gwern comments on Open Thread, August 2010 - Less Wrong

4 Post author: NancyLebovitz 01 August 2010 01:27PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (676)
Tags: open_thread

Comments (676)

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

Comment author: gwern 02 August 2010 11:13:57AM *  2 points [-]

You could either

  1. donate the money to charity under the view 'and you're both wrong, so there!'
  2. say that the prediction is implicitly a big AND - 'there will be an AI by 2100 AND said first AI will not have... etc.', and that the conditions allow 'short-circuiting' when any AI is created; with this change, reaching 2100 is a loss on your part.
  3. Like #2, but the loss is on Eliezer's part (the bet changes to 'I think there won't be an AI by 2100, but if there is, it won't be Friendly and etc.')

I like #2 better since I dislike implicit premises and this (while you two are still relatively young and healthy) is as good a time as any to clarify the terms. But #1 follows more the Long Bets formula.

Comment author: Unknowns 02 August 2010 07:58:55PM 1 point [-]

Eliezer and I are probably about equally confident that "there will not be AI by 2100, and both Eliezer and Unknown will still be alive" is incorrect. So it doesn't seem very fair to select either 2 or 3. So option 1 seems better.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit