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.

Singularity Institute is now Machine Intelligence Research Institute

32 Post author: Kaj_Sotala 31 January 2013 08:25AM

http://singularity.org/blog/2013/01/30/we-are-now-the-machine-intelligence-research-institute-miri/

As Risto Saarelma pointed out on IRC, "Volcano Lair Doom Institute" would have been cooler, but this is pretty good too. As the word "Singularity" has pretty much lost its meaning, it's better to have a name that doesn't give a new person all kinds of weird initial associations as their first impression. And "Machine Intelligence Research Institute" is appropriately descriptive while still being general enough.

Comments (99)

Comment author: Document 11 April 2015 04:21:54AM 0 points [-]

I wonder if anyone suggested the Council for Understanding Logic and Technology.

Comment author: curiousepic 28 February 2013 07:17:59PM 0 points [-]

I just realized that "MIRI" is (perhaps intentionally) evocative of the word "mirror", which is all kinds of suitable.

Comment author: bentarm 03 February 2013 04:48:28PM 0 points [-]

I notice that http://www.miri.org is very definitely not a placeholder for a new Singularity Institute page. Have you managed to acquire it?

(miri.com seems as though it should be available, but not exactly entirely appropriate. Maybe better than nothing).

Comment author: Kaj_Sotala 03 February 2013 08:13:50PM 1 point [-]

Have you managed to acquire it?

Nope.

Comment author: JoshuaFox 03 February 2013 09:20:41AM 0 points [-]

Good.

The name "Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence" seemed clunky to me from the moment I encountered it.

Too long. Two parts that don't work together, a first part with social acceptability issues, and a second part which has been taboo in leading tech circles since 1992.

It took me about half a year before I stopped typing siai.org when looking for the Institute's site.

Not to mention that SU took over the mindspace, and that SI occasionally strayed from the area implied by its name.

So, good job! I like it.

Comment author: novalis 31 January 2013 10:23:54PM 5 points [-]

Don't forget to redo your credit card design, when you get around to it.

Comment author: JoshuaFox 31 January 2013 07:28:42PM 0 points [-]

Now, all we need is a replacement for "Singularitarian" ... this, time, one that people can get right when they try to repeat it.

Comment author: MichaelAnissimov 03 February 2013 02:54:21AM 1 point [-]

Transhumanist

Comment author: [deleted] 03 February 2013 05:46:52AM 3 points [-]

Already exists, and not all transhumanists are singularitarians.

Comment author: MichaelAnissimov 03 February 2013 02:53:17AM 1 point [-]

Transhumanist

Comment author: JoshuaFox 03 February 2013 09:12:30AM *  2 points [-]

Singularitarians are, IMHO, a subtype of Tranhumanists who are (1) focused on the Intelligence Explosion rather than nanotech, life extension, cryopreservation, Cyborg art, or any other Transhumanist area, and (2) do something about it.

Of course, people canbe Singularitarians and also other things as well, and people can believe something is a good idea without doing anything about it, but the above definition seems significant enough to be worth having a name for.

You could also potentially be a Singularitarian but not a Transhumanist, if you focused on AGI safety and even Friendliness, without caring about the entire H+ memeplex. Though there may be nobody like this today, I can imagine a future in which a game theorist or other scientist enters the field out of a combined desire to do good and to boost their career, but is not interested in all the other stuff.

Comment author: John_Maxwell_IV 01 February 2013 07:44:12AM 5 points [-]

What happened to futurist, transhumanist, extropian?

Comment author: CronoDAS 01 February 2013 03:51:24AM 1 point [-]

"Phyg" member! ;)

Comment author: [deleted] 01 February 2013 04:05:29AM 0 points [-]

"phygger"

Comment author: handoflixue 31 January 2013 10:26:28PM 0 points [-]

Mirian seems easy to say :)

Comment author: John_Maxwell_IV 01 February 2013 07:42:28AM 2 points [-]

That's a terrible idea if they want to maintain credibility as a serious independent bunch of academic types.

Comment author: handoflixue 01 February 2013 09:48:29PM -2 points [-]

I had assumed the question was more aimed towards LessWrong, not serious academic usage. I'd expect academic references to be in the form "I work for MIRI", not cutesy shorthand.

Comment author: John_Maxwell_IV 02 February 2013 08:19:41AM *  2 points [-]

Still, no one walks around calling themself a CSAILian. If there are people calling themselves Mirians, even if those people aren't directly affiliated with MIRI, that could hurt MIRI's credibility, I suspect, because it would make them seem unusual relative to other serious research groups.

Comment author: Mitchell_Porter 31 January 2013 04:19:04PM 38 points [-]

MIRI's number-one goal will be the discovery of a Consequentialist Anticipatory Logic that can save the world (codename, MIRI-CAL).

Comment author: Andreas_Giger 31 January 2013 03:34:51PM 1 point [-]

Looks like an attempt to get rid of the negative image associated with the name Singularity Institute. I wonder if it isn't already too late to take PR seriously.

Comment author: gwern 31 January 2013 03:45:41PM *  5 points [-]

Looks like an attempt to get rid of the negative image associated with the name Singularity Institute.

From OP:

When Singularity University (SU) acquired the Singularity Summit from us in December, we also agreed to change the name of our institute to avoid brand confusion between the Singularity Institute and Singularity University.

I'm not sure this name change is a good idea or worth whatever SU offered (or that there was a real brand issue), but there apparently was some other motivation than 'SI now has embarrassing connotations'.

Comment author: David_Gerard 31 January 2013 05:47:43PM *  9 points [-]

There is a real brand issue. I say "Singularity Institute" to people down the pub, the ones who've heard the word go "ah, Kurzweil!" (I was trying to explain this site I like called LessWrong.)

Comment author: Rain 31 January 2013 05:56:06PM 10 points [-]

I told someone at work, and they said, "Oh, like on that Fringe episode [about Kurzweillian uploading]."

Comment author: Kaj_Sotala 31 January 2013 04:17:51PM 14 points [-]

SU and SI kept getting confused with each other all the time.

Comment author: ciphergoth 03 February 2013 08:12:18AM 9 points [-]

Also, when you're trying to explain that there's a gigantic difference between you and another organisation with a similar-sounding name, you can sound a little like the People's Front of Judea.

Comment author: gwern 31 January 2013 05:04:49PM 0 points [-]

By whom? I think the only time I personally saw that happen online was in one British newspaper article.

Comment author: ciphergoth 03 February 2013 08:10:59AM 3 points [-]

When I stayed with a friend in the Bay Area, I was confused that he said he knew loads of people in SingInst, but kept naming people I'd never heard of - and guess why!

Comment author: lukeprog 31 January 2013 08:57:47PM *  12 points [-]

By whom?

Almost every time I spoke to anyone who wasn't deeply familiar with either SU or SI. Including almost every press person.

Comment author: Alicorn 31 January 2013 06:30:40PM 11 points [-]

Rudi Hoffman confused them when I sought a quote from him and mentioned Singinst. And him you'd expect to move in the right circles to know the difference.

Comment author: Alex_Altair 31 January 2013 05:34:27PM 22 points [-]

My impression is that anyone who has ever heard of Singularity University doesn't even have it in their hypothesis space that you mean something different when you say Singularity Institute.

Comment author: Kevin 03 February 2013 06:02:24AM 2 points [-]

Yup.

Even when they do have it in their hypothesis space, it still gets mangled. I recently got a follow-up email from someone that still thought I was Singularity University. I had briefly explained to him about how SU had acquired the Singularity Summit from us, and his follow-up email said "now that you have acquired the Singularity Summit, you may be interested in my product..."

Comment author: shminux 31 January 2013 03:21:29PM -1 points [-]

What MIRI really is is the Institute for study of emergent intelligences, whether machine, biological, hybrid or any other kind, but given how Eliezer dislikes the term emergence, I can see why EIRI would be a non-starter. Still, I like the new name better than the old one.

Comment author: hankx7787 09 February 2013 04:33:30PM 3 points [-]

"What exactly do you mean by ‘machine’, such that humans are not machines?" - Eliezer Yudkowsky

Comment author: shminux 09 February 2013 07:08:15PM 1 point [-]

Good point. The Wikipedia description certainly covers humans.

Comment author: David_Gerard 31 January 2013 05:49:26PM -1 points [-]

First hit on EIRI. More appositely, EIRI exists.

Comment author: fubarobfusco 01 February 2013 12:06:53AM 0 points [-]

... and here I was thinking of Masami Eiri from Serial Experiments Lain.

Comment author: shminux 31 January 2013 05:57:59PM 0 points [-]

Surely this is not your real objection. One can try EII or IEI or...

Comment author: Baughn 31 January 2013 03:53:46PM 1 point [-]

There's a reason he doesn't like it..

I'm not entirely sure what your sentence means. Could you rewrite it to not use "emergence" (or define "emergence")?

Comment author: shminux 31 January 2013 04:40:24PM *  9 points [-]

The reason he does not like the term is that, as pointed out before, "emergence" is not an explanation of anything. However, it is an observational phenomenon: when you get a lot of simple things together, they combine in ways one could not foresee and the resulting entities behave by the rules not constructable from (but reducible to) those of the simple constituents. When you combine a lot of simple molecules, you get a solid, a liquid or a gas with the properties you generally cannot infer without observing them first. When you get a group of people together, they start interacting in apriori unpredictable ways as they form a group. Once you observe the group behavior, you can often reduce it to that of its constituents, but a useful description is generally not in terms of the constituents, but in terms of the collective. For example, in thermodynamics people use gas laws and other macroscopic laws instead of the Newton's laws.

I am guessing that one reason that the (friendly) machine intelligence problem is so hard is that intelligence is an emergent property: once you understand it, you can reduce it to interactions between neurons, but you cannot infer it from such interactions. And what's more, it's several layers above, given that intelligence evolved long after simpler neural processes got established.

Thus what MIRI is doing is studying the laws of an emergent structure (AI) without being able to observe the structure first, since it does not exist, yet. This is like trying to deduce the behavior of a bee hive by studying single cells. Even if you come up with some new "emergent" laws, it may well end up being more like a tree than a hive.

Comment author: gjm 03 February 2013 05:47:13PM 1 point [-]

Surely what MIRI would ideally like to do is to find a way of making intelligence not "emergent", so that it's easier to make something intelligent that behaves predictably enough to be classified as Friendly.

Comment author: shminux 03 February 2013 07:57:40PM 0 points [-]

find a way of making intelligence not "emergent"

I don't believe that MIRI has been consciously paying attention to thwarting undesirable emergence, given that EY refuses to acknowledge it as a real phenomenon.

Comment author: gjm 03 February 2013 09:43:56PM 0 points [-]

I fear we're at cross purposes. I meant not "thwart emergent intelligence" but "find ways of making intelligence that don't rely on it emerging mysteriously from incomprehensible complications".

Comment author: shminux 03 February 2013 10:22:27PM 1 point [-]

Sure, you cannot rely on spontaneous emergence for anything predictable, as neural network attempts at AGI demonstrate. My point was that if you ignore the chance of something emerging, that something will emerge in a most inopportune moment. I see your original point, though. Not sure if it can be successful. My guess is that the best case is some kind of "controlled emergence", where you at least set the parameter space of what might happen.

Comment author: drethelin 31 January 2013 09:43:35PM 2 points [-]

Emergence is a subset of the word Surprise. It's not meaningless but you can't use it to usefully predict things you want to achieve with something, because it's equivalent to saying "If we put all these things together maybe they'll surprise us in an awesome way!"

Comment author: timtyler 01 February 2013 12:10:45AM 1 point [-]

If something is an emergent property, you can bet on it not being the sum of its parts. That has some use.

Comment author: loup-vaillant 01 February 2013 11:21:03AM *  0 points [-]

Aiming the tiny Friendly dot in AI-space is not one of them, though.

Comment author: shminux 31 January 2013 10:07:44PM *  1 point [-]

Sort of. It is not surprising that incremental quantitative changes results in a qualitative change, but the exact nature of what emerges can indeed be quite a surprise. It is nevertheless useful to keep in mind the general pattern in order to not be blindsided by the fact of emergence in each particular case ("But... but.. they are all nice people, I didn't expect them to turn into a mindless murderous mob!"). And to be ready to take action when the emergent entity hits the fan.

Comment author: drethelin 01 February 2013 01:32:15AM 0 points [-]

Agreed. Like with surprises, you can try to be robust to them or agile enough to adapt.

Comment author: Baughn 31 January 2013 10:28:10PM *  1 point [-]

Or in simpler terms, AI is a crapshoot.

Comment author: pleeppleep 31 January 2013 02:27:40PM 0 points [-]

Kinda awkward to say aloud. I think Institute for the Research of Machine Intelligence would sound better. Minor nitpick.

Comment author: Kevin 01 February 2013 01:44:56AM 1 point [-]

IRMI?

irm-y? Sounds like squirm. Or the name Erma.

Comment author: Kaj_Sotala 31 January 2013 03:00:16PM 7 points [-]

Really? To me, the extra words in "Institute for the Research of Machine Intelligence" feel redundant, and MIRI is better for being concise and to the point.

Comment author: Rain 31 January 2013 01:43:45PM 11 points [-]

I like it.

Does this mean I have to put both on my tax forms for donations this year?

Comment author: lukeprog 31 January 2013 08:55:25PM 5 points [-]

We'll be sure to inform all 2013 donors of the proper procedure.

Comment author: [deleted] 31 January 2013 02:39:51PM 5 points [-]

And what about paypal monthlys? Will they redirect properly or do I have to exert agency?

Comment author: lukeprog 31 January 2013 08:55:41PM 4 points [-]

We'll be in touch with everyone about that when the time comes.

Comment author: Tuxedage 31 January 2013 12:57:50PM 5 points [-]

I personally dislike the change, but I trust that you guys have changed your names for a reason. I think I may be reacting negatively due to the nostalgia factor.

Comment author: Alexei 31 January 2013 11:27:36PM 7 points [-]
Comment author: Qiaochu_Yuan 31 January 2013 07:37:48PM 15 points [-]

Reversal test: if it were always called MIRI and just now decided to change its name to SIAI, how would you feel about it? (This isn't quite the right test because maintaining the same name over time does have some value, but it might help.)

Comment author: buybuydandavis 31 January 2013 12:05:41PM 4 points [-]

it's better to have a name that doesn't give a new person all kinds of weird initial associations as their first impression.

Yeah, though I buy into much of what Kurzweil has to say, Singularity has always rubbed me the wrong way - too much of Omega Immanentizing the Eschaton for me.

Is there any other snappy term out there for the idea that we're headed for very big changes through exponential performance improvement in lots of technologies?

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 01 February 2013 03:29:49AM 2 points [-]

Yeah, though I buy into much of what Kurzweil has to say, Singularity has always rubbed me the wrong way - too much of Omega Immanentizing the Eschaton for me.

Changing the name doesn't change the fact that they're trying to Immanentize the Eschaton.

Comment author: [deleted] 31 January 2013 11:14:58AM 5 points [-]

Why "Machine" rather than "Artificial"?

Comment author: Kaj_Sotala 31 January 2013 12:59:11PM 9 points [-]

To me, "Machine Intelligence" sounds less worn than "Artificial Intelligence", and also seems to more strongly imply that they're talking about general intelligence rather than narrow AI. But I don't know whether those were the actual reasons.

Comment author: amacfie 31 January 2013 05:46:49PM 3 points [-]

I was under the impression that this use of the word "machine" was archaic -- it was used decades ago for naming things like machine learning, machine translation, and the Association for Computing Machinery. I don't immediately see why a more familiar term wasn't used.

Comment author: loup-vaillant 01 February 2013 10:09:00AM 0 points [-]

Possibly for the "M". Imagine "AIRI" instead of "MIRI".

Comment author: [deleted] 31 January 2013 05:31:31PM 2 points [-]

"Machine Intelligence" sounds less worn than "Artificial Intelligence"

It does, but why “worn” is a bad thing in this context? Wouldn't you want a familiar-sounding phrase?

and also seems to more strongly imply that they're talking about general intelligence rather than narrow AI

I get the reverse impression, probably because “artificial intelligence” reminds me of science fiction, whereas “machine intelligence” reminds me of Google Translate and self-driving cars.

Comment author: FiftyTwo 31 January 2013 03:37:17PM 1 point [-]

Agreed. Also is narrower, you could plausibly argue that lots of things were 'artificial intelligence' (e.g. bioengineered neural goop) but machine is closer to what we're actually talking about.

Comment author: David_Gerard 31 January 2013 01:03:53PM 1 point [-]

The first hit on "AIRI" isn't as good.

Comment author: Xachariah 31 January 2013 11:10:40AM *  57 points [-]

The new acronym for the Singularity Institute is MIRI.

The first google hit is the wikipedia page for the Star Trek: TOS episode Miri (S1E8). It's about how 90% of the population of not-Earth was destroyed by an existential threat leaving nothing but irrational children. The crew find themselves under a death sentence from this threat and try to find a solution, but they need the children's help. However the children think themselves immune and immortal and won't assist. In the last seconds, the crew manages to convince the children that the existential threat cannot be ignored and must be solved or the kids will eventually die too. With their help, the crew saves the day and everyone lives happily ever after. Also, the episode was so ahead of it's time that even though it was reviewed as excellent, it got so many complaints that it was never rebroadcast for 20 years.

I think my symbolism detector just pegged off the charts then exploded.

Comment author: lukeprog 27 February 2013 05:26:29AM 4 points [-]

Near the end of the episode, Kirk is trying to persuade the irrational children to help him save the planet, and the children just keep yelling "Blah Blah Blah!"

Kirk says:

No "blah blah blah"! Because... if you don't help us, there won't be any games anymore. There won't be anything. Nothing... Forever and ever...

...I'm begging you: let me help you! Or there won't be anything left at all.

Comment author: lukeprog 26 February 2013 08:55:16PM *  5 points [-]

For the record, we totally didn't know this before you posted this comment. I remember seeing the Google search result but didn't read the plot summary on Wikipedia.

Comment author: Kawoomba 26 February 2013 09:07:10PM 5 points [-]

You should still replace his broken symbolism detector, if only symbolically.

Comment author: MugaSofer 01 February 2013 01:08:44PM -1 points [-]

I knew I'd heard that name somewhere ... suddenly feel a lot more respect for whoever picked it.

Comment author: wuncidunci 31 January 2013 02:44:17PM *  7 points [-]

When I searched the first hit was the Malaysian town called Miri. Looks like an example of filter bubbles.

Comment author: Xachariah 31 January 2013 03:56:34PM *  1 point [-]

What do you get when you use incognito mode? I checked with that and got the same Star Trek result. I think incognito pops Google's filter bubble, although I'm not certain.

Though other search engines do give me the Malaysian town.

Comment author: wuncidunci 31 January 2013 04:00:38PM 0 points [-]

The same, though Star Trek comes up second. Though google uses a lot of other info about your computer to determine the results (like IP-adress and browser details).

Comment author: Xachariah 31 January 2013 04:16:35PM 5 points [-]

I had overlooked that I was trying to hide from Google using their own software. Of course they wouldn't have provided it if it worked against them. Silly of me in retrospect.

A handful of proxies verify that it is indeed Malaysia first and Star Trek second.

Comment author: FiftyTwo 31 January 2013 03:15:37PM 0 points [-]

Same, followed by "Mid-Infrared Instrument "

Comment author: gwern 31 January 2013 03:43:48PM 0 points [-]

Funny, I get Star Trek, Malaysia, language, Star Trek, musical instructor, and only hit #6 is yours.

Comment author: [deleted] 31 January 2013 02:54:38PM 2 points [-]
Comment deleted 31 January 2013 12:03:48PM [-]
Comment author: Exiles 31 January 2013 12:58:25PM 11 points [-]

We wish, Dmytry.

Comment author: Benito 31 January 2013 10:54:41AM 15 points [-]

This is an interesting example of how the changing definitions doesn't change reality. 'Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence' sounded all future-y to me, and 'Machine Intelligence Research Institute' sounds all technical and intelligent (silly stereotypes), but in reality they've not changed. Still the same people, doing the same things.

Gonna have to change the site name, though...

Comment author: private_messaging 01 February 2013 08:48:55AM 2 points [-]

The Machine Intelligence Research Institute indeed sounds like some older guys, maybe cranky but well accomplished in the field, working on something... That is until you find star trek reference.

Comment author: timtyler 31 January 2013 10:46:47AM *  6 points [-]

"Machine Intelligence" is my preferred term. "Singularity" seems like pseudoscientific terminology to me.

Comment author: Larks 31 January 2013 10:20:01AM 16 points [-]

I think this is a good change. Bravo!

It will be hard not to refer to "Singinst" anymore as it did trip off the tougne, but I guess "The Singularity Institute for or against Artificial Intelligence, depending on which seems like a better idea at the time" was never really on the cards.

Comment author: Benito 01 February 2013 06:59:26AM 0 points [-]

We could call it the Machriarchy.

(MACHine intelligence ReaseARCH Institute, and just stick in the 'I')

Comment author: cody-bryce 31 January 2013 02:57:36PM 5 points [-]

There is an important tradition of people using the former names of things for decades.

Comment author: wedrifid 31 January 2013 08:57:44AM *  8 points [-]

And "Machine Intelligence Research Institute" is appropriately descriptive while still being general enough.

MIRI. Machine Intelligence Research Institute.

Adequate. Not especially inspiring but I can't think of anything better either. It is certainly better than "Singularity Institute". (Good change!)

Comment author: RomeoStevens 31 January 2013 08:54:35AM 4 points [-]

Is it an acronym or initialism?

Comment author: Baughn 31 January 2013 03:58:40PM 5 points [-]

I'm vaguely suspecting a retronym, based on that Star Trek episode.