ciphergoth comments on Holden Karnofsky's Singularity Institute Objection 2 - Less Wrong

11 Post author: ciphergoth 11 May 2012 07:18AM

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

Comments (41)

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

Comment author: ciphergoth 11 May 2012 04:10:49PM 13 points [-]

So what? He may be an amateur, but he is very clearly a highly intelligent person who has worked hard to understand SI's position. SI is correct to acknowledge as a flaw that no part of their published writings addresses what he is saying for a nonspecialist like him.

Comment author: timtyler 12 May 2012 01:16:21AM *  1 point [-]

Holden should update here, IMO. One of the lessons is probably to not criticise others reagrding complex technical topics when you don't really understand them. Holden's case doesn't really benefit from technical overstatements, IMO - especially muddled ones.

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 13 May 2012 03:26:06PM 2 points [-]

Holden should update here, IMO.

Even assuming that you are right, SI should write more clearly, to make it for people like Holden easier to update.

If you try to communicate an idea, and even intelligent and curious people get it wrong, something is wrong with the message.

Comment author: timtyler 13 May 2012 06:01:37PM 2 points [-]

If you try to communicate an idea, and even intelligent and curious people get it wrong, something is wrong with the message.

String theory seems to be a counter example. That's relevant since machine intelligence is a difficult topic.