You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

SingInst bloomberg coverage [link]

5 Post author: Dr_Manhattan 19 December 2011 07:31PM

Comments (16)

Comment author: Incorrect 19 December 2011 09:14:30PM *  13 points [-]

They're adherents of the Singularity, a sort of nerd rapture that will occur when machines become smarter than people and begin advancing technological change on their own, eventually outpacing and - in a worst-case scenario - enslaving people before getting bored and grinding us up into fleshy pulp. This, as it happens, resembles the prospect that had the Unabomber, Ted Kaczynski, all worked up.

Well that's a strawman if I ever saw one. This is past the point where embellishment becomes deception.

Comment author: David_Gerard 19 December 2011 11:01:12PM *  22 points [-]

The stuff about SIAI is pretty positive in the context of the rest, but that paragraph reaches actually quite daunting levels of not giving a shit, and I speak as someone with experience in being paid badly enough for journalism not to give a shit. I almost admire the writer's ability to wreak such epistemological violence in so few simple sentences, in a manner that it would be hard to complain effectively to her editor about. And I thought I hated tech journalism.

Comment author: Karmakaiser 20 December 2011 03:36:15AM 10 points [-]

It was elegantly, and concisely wrong. It was like Nega-Prachett.

Comment author: Normal_Anomaly 22 December 2011 11:37:38PM 1 point [-]

I am going to steal that description.

Comment author: Kevin 20 December 2011 01:40:40AM 4 points [-]

Regardless, this is still one of the best mainstream journalism pieces of existential risk, ever.

Comment author: David_Gerard 20 December 2011 11:17:33AM 7 points [-]

That's really not saying a lot.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 20 December 2011 04:04:29AM 2 points [-]

Have you read Kaczynski?

Comment author: David_Gerard 20 December 2011 11:14:53AM 6 points [-]

That the sentence fragment is technically accurate does not somehow make it not poisoning the well.

Comment author: fetidodor 20 December 2011 06:58:29AM 1 point [-]

Personally, no, is that what he really talks about?

Comment author: saturn 20 December 2011 09:58:36AM *  4 points [-]

He does touch on the idea of a singleton that enslaves humanity, as one of several possible negative outcomes of our not renouncing technology and destroying modern society.

(It's been about 10 years since I read his manifesto, so I'm not very confident that I remember it accurately.)

Comment author: Dr_Manhattan 20 December 2011 02:55:04AM 9 points [-]

BTW, the author and I share the same employer, she's an email away from getting 'suggestions' if you have any really good ones.

Comment author: Manfred 22 December 2011 01:14:01AM 3 points [-]

Well, if you're going to use the phrase "nerd rapture," at least mention that there are multiple ideas about what sort of technological change would qualify as a "singularity," and the "nerd rapture" is often called the "dreaded fourth definition" :)

Comment author: Kevin 20 December 2011 01:40:01AM 9 points [-]

This was syndicated to sfgate, http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/guardians-of-the-apocalypse-12152011.html is the original which has an awesome Nick Bostrom based pixel art infographic.

Comment author: lukeprog 06 January 2012 01:42:48AM 0 points [-]

The printed copy is even better. Check out the pullquote on the last page.

Comment author: false_vacuum 20 December 2011 01:01:46PM *  5 points [-]

“There are a number of people who have knowledge in this field that estimate humanity’s chance at making it through this century at about 50 percent,” Schwall says. “Even if that number is way off and it’s one in a billion, that’s too high for me.”

Presumably he meant something different.

Comment author: Normal_Anomaly 22 December 2011 11:39:31PM 4 points [-]

The first part, with its references to the Unabomber and the "nerd rapture," had me expecting a load of criticism of SIAI. The amount of respect it got in the second half was surprising. Anecdotal evidence that SIAI is doing a good job of setting itself up as the respectable, sane, not-Ray-Kurzweil version of existential risk advocacy.