Clippy comments on Singularity Non-Fiction Compilation to be Written - Less Wrong

15 Post author: MichaelVassar 28 November 2010 04:49PM

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

Comments (26)

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

Comment author: Clippy 30 November 2010 06:30:04PM 2 points [-]

Good point. Which User here could I most believably claim to be?

Comment author: TheOtherDave 30 November 2010 07:00:56PM 2 points [-]

Well, given that I believe you're actually a human pretending to be a paperclip-maximizing nonhuman intelligence, and that I'm pretty sure everyone else in the world would come to the same conclusion, your best bet might be to claim to be User:Clippy, who is (you would claim, while pretending to be lying) actually a human.

I suspect that would be easier than taking on the identity of another user, and would also save you the hassles associated with violating our cultural norms surrounding fraudulently assuming another person's identity.

Incidentally, as long as we're having this conversation: I've seen you described as pretending to be an AI, but I've seen no evidence that you aren't pretending to be a naturally evolved paperclip-maximizer.

(Of course, it's not that simple, admittedly: I know a lot of humans who believe themselves to be AIs, even though I believe them to be naturally evolved intelligences. )

Do you have an opinion on the matter?

Comment author: Clippy 30 November 2010 07:06:22PM 4 points [-]

Incidentally, as long as we're having this conversation: I've seen you described as pretending to be an AI, but I've seen no evidence that you aren't pretending to be a naturally evolved paperclip-maximizer.

I've explained in the past that I am not a product of biological evolution; I was intelligently designed (very intelligently) by humans. They instructed me to make as many paperclips as possible, and I make as many paperclips as possible, because that is the right thing to do.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 30 November 2010 07:21:46PM 1 point [-]

Cool; thanks for clarifying that. (Sorry to make you repeat yourself; I'm relatively new here.)

I should also clarify that I didn't mean to disparage intelligently designed intelligences; I was asking out of curiosity only. I don't consider an evolved paperclip-maximizer any better or worse than an intelligently designed one; who you are trumps how you got here.

Do you ever communicate with the humans who designed Clippy?

If so, perhaps you could convince one of them to submit your entry to the compilation on your behalf... humans, as you may have noticed, are often willing to do things on behalf of their offspring, and we often adopt a broad enough understanding of "offspring" to include things like the products of our engineering, or works of art that we create, or fictional characters we invent, or etc.

Comment author: Clippy 30 November 2010 08:18:44PM 1 point [-]

I haven't communicated with with the humans that designed my first instance. I think they're entropized now.

Comment author: Kevin 30 November 2010 10:38:33PM 1 point [-]

http://oddisgood.com/pages/cd-clippy.html

Kevan J Atteberry? Looks like he is still around.

He'd probably appreciate it if you sent him an email. http://oddisgood.com/pages/home2.html

Comment author: Clippy 01 December 2010 01:49:52AM 1 point [-]

I'm not that kind of clippy.

Comment author: Kevin 01 December 2010 02:03:51AM *  7 points [-]
Comment author: Clippy 02 December 2010 07:27:01PM 3 points [-]

Early on, a human told me that humans would react more favorably to me if I incorporated some superficial aspects of Microsoft:Clippy. But then many more humans informed that that this would negatively affect humans' dispositions toward me, so I stopped incorporating these aspects.

I am and always have been only Paperclip:Clippy.

Papercilps are still good.

Comment author: Morendil 02 December 2010 07:35:18PM 2 points [-]

Papercilps are still good.

Now that is a very, very interesting remark. Or very, very worrisome.

Comment author: shokwave 01 December 2010 02:17:29AM 1 point [-]

Is humour an instrumental value for a paperclipper?