Aleksei_Riikonen comments on Existential Risk and Public Relations - Less Wrong

36 Post author: multifoliaterose 15 August 2010 07:16AM

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

Comments (613)

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

Comment author: wedrifid 15 August 2010 05:09:50PM *  12 points [-]

Yet you SIAI S^ invite these proponents of global suicide by AI, K-type S^, to your conferences and give them standing ovations. ... You are a deeply schizophrenic little culture, which for a sociologist like me is just fascinating.

This is a perfect example of where the 'outside view' can go wrong. Even the most basic 'inside view' of the topic would make it overwhelmingly obvious why a "75% certain of death by AI" folks could be allied (or the same people!) as the "solve all problems through AI" group. Splitting the two positions prematurely and trying to make a simple model of political adversity like that is just naive.

I personally guess >= 75% for AI death and also advocate FAI research. Preventing AI development indefinitely via desperate politico-military struggle would just not work in the long term. Trying would be utter folly. Nevermind the even longer term which would probably result in undesirable outcomes even if humanity did manage to artificially stunt its own progress in such a manner.

(The guy also uses 'schizophrenic' incorrectly.)

Comment author: Aleksei_Riikonen 15 August 2010 07:35:32PM *  4 points [-]

I don't think James Hughes would present or believe in that particular low-quality analysis himself either, if he didn't feel that SIAI is an organization competing with his IEET for popularity within the transhumanist subculture.

So mostly that statement is probably just about using "divide and conquer" towards transhumanists/singularitarians who are currently more popular within the transhumanist subculture than he is.

Comment author: timtyler 15 August 2010 07:49:05PM *  0 points [-]

James Hughes seems like a fine fellow to me - and his SIAI disagreements seem fairly genuine. It is much of the rest of IEET that is the problem.