ciphergoth comments on Humans are not automatically strategic - Less Wrong

153 Post author: AnnaSalamon 08 September 2010 07:02AM

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

Comments (266)

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

Comment author: FrF 09 September 2010 04:25:26PM *  1 point [-]

With all respect to Eliezer I think nowadays the gravely anachronistic term "village idiot" shouldn't be used anymore. I wanted to say that almost every time when I see the intelligence scale graphic in his talks.

Comment author: ciphergoth 09 September 2010 04:56:42PM 0 points [-]

In conversation with friends I tend to use George W Bush as the other endpoint - a dig at those hated Greens but it's uncontentious here in the UK, and if it helps keep people listening (which it seems to) it's worth it.

Comment author: mattnewport 09 September 2010 05:45:50PM 9 points [-]

This seems a bad example to use given the context. If you are trying to convince people that greater than human intelligence will give AIs an insurmountable advantage over even the smartest humans then drawing attention to a supposed idiot who became the most powerful man in the world for 8 years raises the question of whether you either don't know what intelligence is or vastly overestimate its ability to grant real world power.

Comment author: ciphergoth 12 September 2010 11:25:55AM 1 point [-]

For the avoidance of doubt, it seems very unlikely in practice that Bush doesn't have above-average intelligence.

Comment author: Emile 09 September 2010 06:59:15PM 3 points [-]

Wikipedia gives him an estimated IQ of 125, which may be a wee bit off for the low end of the IQ distribution. Still, if that's the example that requires the less explanation in practice, why not.

Maybe Forrest Gump would work as well?

Comment author: ciphergoth 19 September 2010 07:59:48AM 0 points [-]

My most recent use of this example got the response George W Bush Was Not Stupid.