beoShaffer comments on "How We're Predicting AI — or Failing to" - Less Wrong

11 Post author: lukeprog 18 November 2012 10:52AM

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

Comments (18)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: beoShaffer 18 November 2012 07:57:57PM 1 point [-]

Overall, a very good paper, both from an AI perspective and in terms of demonstrating how to apply various epistemic techniques that aren't nearly as widespread as they should be. However, I have seen a few typos and other problems. The bottom of page 64 says,"Moore’s law could be taken as an ultimate example of grid: " I think that should be grind. Also, I liked

Care must be taken when applying this method: the point is to extract a useful verifiable prediction, not to weaken or strengthen a reviled or favoured argument. The very first stratagems in Shopenhauer’s “The Art of Always being Right” [17] are to extend and over-generalise the consequences of your opponent’s argument; conversely, one should reduce and narrow down one’s own arguments. There is no lack of rhetorical tricks to uphold one’s own position, but if one is truly after the truth, one must simply attempt to find the most reasonable empirical version of the argument; the truth-testing will come later.

But wish the paper had been slightly more specific about how the authors avoided this failure mode.