= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Thomas comments on Risks from AI and Charitable Giving - 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 (126)
Exactly. And here the parable breaks down. The upload just might have those centuries. Virtual subjective time of thousands of years to devise a cunning plan, before we the humans even discuss their advantage. Yudkowsky has wrote a short story about this. http://lesswrong.com/lw/qk/that_alien_message/
Bugmaster's point was that it takes a century of action by external parties, not a century of subjective thinking time. The timetable doesn't get advanced all that much by super-intelligence. Real-world changes happen on real-world timetables. And yes, the rate of change might be exponential, but exponential curves grow slowly at first.
And meanwhile, other things are happening in that century that might upset the plans and that cannot be arbitrarily controlled even by super-intelligence.
Err... minor quibble.
Exponential curves grow at the same rate all the time. That is, if you zoom in on the x^2 graph at any point at any scale, it will look exactly the same as it did before you zoomed in.
I think we are using "rate" in different ways. The absolute rate of change per unit time for an exponential is hardly constant; If you look at the segment of e^x near, say, e^10, it's growing much faster than it is at e^(-10).
asr got my point exactly right.