Thomas comments on I Stand by the Sequences - Less Wrong

14 Post author: Grognor 15 May 2012 10:21AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (248)
Tags: phyg

Comments (248)

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

Comment author: Thomas 15 May 2012 01:57:24PM 1 point [-]

Excellently explained. Now, do we have 127?

Comment author: drnickbone 15 May 2012 11:05:38PM 2 points [-]

Anyone else voting for 0?

Most of the opinions in the list sound so whacky that 0 is likely the default position of someone outside Less Wrong. I've been here a few months, and read most of the Sequences, but none of the bits in my own bitmap has flipped. Sorry Eliezer!

The odd thing is that I find myself understanding almost exactly why Eliezer holds these opinions, and the perfectly lucid reasoning leading to them, and yet I still don't agree with them. A number of them are opinions I'd already considered myself or held myself at some point, but then later rejected. Or I hold a rather more nuanced or agnostic position than I used to.

Comment author: Thomas 16 May 2012 07:45:47AM *  0 points [-]

What is the number of the most relevant points from the Sequences? The Grognor's selection of those 7 may not be the best. Let me try:

BitNumber Statement

  • 0 Intelligence explosion is likely in a (near) future

  • 1 FOOM is possible to occur

  • 2 Total reductionism

  • 3 Bayesism is greater than science

  • 4 Action to save the world is a must

  • 5 No (near) aliens

  • 6 FAI or die

  • 7 CEV is the way to go

  • 8 MWI

  • 9 Evolution is stupid and slow

Now, I agree with those from 0 to 5 (first six) in this list I've select. The binary number wold be "111111" or 63 in the decimal notation. They were not new to me, all 10 of them.

Yudkowsky's fiction is just great, BTW. The "Three world collide" may the the best story I have ever read.

Comment author: Grognor 22 May 2012 04:09:10AM 3 points [-]

CEV is the way to go

I'd like to point out that CEV is not in the sequences, and it looks mostly like a starting point idea from which to springboard to the "true" way to build an FAI.

Comment author: Thomas 22 May 2012 07:28:38AM -1 points [-]

I don't care, if the teaching is divided between Sequences and elsewhere.

Comment author: prase 16 May 2012 08:08:46PM 1 point [-]

If I intended to encode my beliefs (which I don't), I couldn't, because I don't:

  • know what's the precise difference between 0 and 1
  • understand 2 - what's total reductionism, especially in contrast to ordinary reductionism
  • see any novel insight in 9, which leads me to suspect I am missing the point
Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit