Discussion: Yudkowsky's actual accomplishments besides divulgation

Raw_Power

Basically this: "Eliezer Yudkowsky writes and pretends he's an AI researcher but probably hasn't written so much as an Eliza bot."

While the Eliezer S. Yudkowsky site has lots of divulgation articles and his work on rationality is of indisputable value, I find myself at a loss when I want to respond to this. Which frustrates me very much.

So, to avoid this sort of situation in the future, I have to ask: What did the man, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky, actually accomplish in his own field?

Please don't downvote the hell out of me, I'm just trying to create a future reference for this sort of annoyance.

Basically this: "Eliezer Yudkowsky writes and pretends he's an AI researcher but probably hasn't written so much as an Eliza bot."

So, to avoid this sort of situation in the future, I have to ask: What did the man, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky, actually accomplish in his own field?

Please don't downvote the hell out of me, I'm just trying to create a future reference for this sort of annoyance.

I'd agree that they "prove little" but they do constitute evidence.

They constitute anecdotal evidence. Such evidence is usually considered to be pretty low-grade by scientists.

LOL, yes, that's why it weights little. But, see, it still gets to considerably shift one's expectations on the matter because it had a very low probability assigned to its happening, as per Conservation Of Expected Evidence. Let's just say it counts as Rational Evidence, m'kay? Its merit is mostly to open places in Idea Space.

Eliezer Yudkowsky likes playing role-playing games where they act as a superintelligence, and then boast about how smart he is afterwards

Honestly, so do I. Have you ever played Genius The Transgression? Look, we all know he's ful... (read more)

3Benquo15y

The evidence is materially better than ordinary anecdote because the fact of the experiment was published before results were available. And it's a demonstration of reasonable possibility, not high probability. It's n=5, but that's materially better than nothing. In fact, taking some reasonable low probability of the human failure rate, such as 1%, the p-value is quite low as well, so it's a statistically significant result.

39

Discussion: Yudkowsky's actual accomplishments besides divulgation

39

39

39

Discussion: Yudkowsky's actual accomplishments besides divulgation

39

39