= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Lumifer comments on A big Singularity-themed Hollywood movie out in April offers many opportunities to talk about AI risk - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
Comments (84)
So you are ready to kill people in order to shift the public perception of an existential risk issue by a tiny bit?
I never claimed to be a complete utilitarian. For that matter I wouldn't push fat men of bridges.
As far as the Wikipedia policy goes, it a policy that just doesn't matter much in the grant scheme of things. For what it's worth I never touched the German Quantified Self that contained a paragraph with my name for a long time.
I do however have personal reasons for opposing the Wikipedia policy as Wikipedia gets the cause of death of my father wrong and I can't easily correct the issue as Wikipedia cites a news article with wrong information as it's source.
Should a good opportunity arise I will place the information somewhere citable and correct that report and I won't feel bad about it.
The Wikipedia policy is designed in a way that encourages interested parties to anonymously edit, and I do think that Wikipedia deserves the edits from interested parties that it gets till it gets a more reasonable policy that allows interested parties to correct factual errors without planting the information somewhere and then editing against policy.
I am not talking about Wikipedia's policies.
You said "worth lives" -- what did you mean by that?