= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
philosophytorres comments on Open thread, October 2011 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (308)
I'd love to know what the community here thinks of some critiques of Nick Bostrom's conception of existential risks, and his more general typology of risks. I'm new to the community, so a bit unsure whether I should completely dive in with a new article, or approach the subject some other way. Thoughts?
Welcome! The LW wiki page on Existential Risk is a good place to start. People here typically take the idea of existential risk seriously, but I don't see much discussion of his specific typology.
AmandaEHouse made a visualization of Bostrom's Superintelligence here, and Katja Grace runs a reading group for Superintelligence, which is probably one of the best places to start looking for discussion.
The open threads are also weekly now, and the current one is here. (You can find a link to the most recent one on the right sidebar when you're in the discussion section.)
The wiki is for stable reference content; you'll notice much of it is definitions of terms, lists of posts for easy reference, and summaries of concepts. The discussion tab on the wiki is used mostly for editors to talk with each other, which very rarely happens.
If you want to have a conversation, posting in the current open thread is probably the best thing to do. (The next step, if you have something long enough to talk about, is posting a post in discussion, which you do by hitting "create new article" to the right of your name and karma display.)