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.

Lumifer comments on Open thread, Oct. 13 - Oct. 19, 2014 - Less Wrong Discussion

5 Post author: MrMind 13 October 2014 08:17AM

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

Comments (355)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Lumifer 17 October 2014 02:58:04AM 2 points [-]

By "anti-Ebola preparations" do you actually mean "minimizing your chance of getting infected"?

Take a tent and go solo camping. Somewhere up North :-)

Comment author: garabik 17 October 2014 08:56:47AM 2 points [-]

That increases other (personal) risks. However, it answers the original question - though not quite correctly, it does not quite minimize the risk of infection - if you accept increasing other risks as a price for decreasing Ebola-risk, there are (much) more dangerous places to go camping, with (much) less Ebola risk (e.g. abandoned underground salt mine). If you accept increasing other risks beyond any reasonable limits, then the answer (which you might very well get from an optimizing AI) is very simple - shoot yourself. Future risk of Ebola infection - zero :-)

Comment author: Larks 17 October 2014 11:07:56PM 0 points [-]

By "anti-Ebola preparations" do you actually mean "minimizing your chance of getting infected"?

No, because as garabik noted, I don't want to commit suicide.

Comment author: Lumifer 18 October 2014 09:20:55PM -1 points [-]

Bonus points for emulating a stupid AI. Not.