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.

Larks comments on Superintelligence 7: Decisive strategic advantage - Less Wrong Discussion

7 Post author: KatjaGrace 28 October 2014 01:01AM

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

Comments (58)

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

Comment author: Larks 01 December 2014 02:02:18AM 0 points [-]

On p82 Bostrom argues that even if one research group has access to another's code, it would still take them months to change approach, which could lead to the leaders getting a full FOOM's worth of headstart. But I don't really understand why he thinks this. If I have access to your code, can't I just run it as soon as I notice you're running it? True, you could obfuscate it, or protect your production-box more carefully. But if I have that good monitoring systems, I'm probably a government, in which case I can afford to have a team dedicated to reverse-engineering your approach.

Comment author: pcm 02 December 2014 03:38:00AM 1 point [-]

I don't see anything about access to code on p82. Are you inferring that from "closely monitor"?

Comment author: Larks 02 December 2014 04:44:45AM 0 points [-]

Yes, and good (implicit) point - perhaps Nick had in mind something slightly less close than access to their codebase.