The most recent post in December's Stupid Questions article is from the 11th.
I suppose as the article's been pushed further down the list of new articles, it's had less exposure, so here's another one for the rest of December.
Plus I have a few questions, so I'll get it kicked off.
It was said in the last one, and it's good advice, I think:
This thread is for asking any questions that might seem obvious, tangential, silly or what-have-you. Don't be shy, everyone has holes in their knowledge, though the fewer and the smaller we can make them, the better.
Please be respectful of other people's admitting ignorance and don't mock them for it, as they're doing a noble thing.
I tried to brainstorm what they might be thinking.
MIRI is making a mistake that means its' work is useless
MIRI won't decrease AI risk unless some other intervention is done first (there is a rerequisite)
We're doomed, resistance is futile
Other people wll fund it if they wait (seems unlikely, if the amount required is trivial to them)
They have political/strategic reasons not to be associated with MIRI (if they contribute anonymously, there's still the risk that other donors will disappear and they'll be stuck supporting it indefinitely)
They'd rather work on the probem wiht their own organization, because of reasons
The most recent post in December's Stupid Questions article is from the 11th.
I suppose as the article's been pushed further down the list of new articles, it's had less exposure, so here's another one for the rest of December.
Plus I have a few questions, so I'll get it kicked off.
It was said in the last one, and it's good advice, I think:
This thread is for asking any questions that might seem obvious, tangential, silly or what-have-you. Don't be shy, everyone has holes in their knowledge, though the fewer and the smaller we can make them, the better.
Please be respectful of other people's admitting ignorance and don't mock them for it, as they're doing a noble thing.