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.

V_V comments on xkcd on the AI box experiment - Less Wrong Discussion

15 Post author: FiftyTwo 21 November 2014 08:26AM

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

Comments (229)

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

Comment author: V_V 22 November 2014 01:28:10AM 10 points [-]

Doing 2 without doing 1 looks insincere.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 23 November 2014 02:05:57AM 8 points [-]

This post is still here, isn't it?

Comment author: ChristianKl 23 November 2014 03:09:39PM 7 points [-]

If I remember right, earlier this year a few posts did disappear.

I'm also not aware of any explicit withdrawal of the previous policy.

Comment author: TobyBartels 23 November 2014 11:42:50PM 3 points [-]

We conclude that free discussion is now allowed, so maybe all that's really missing is putting that up explicitly somewhere that can be linked to?

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 24 November 2014 02:04:12AM 0 points [-]

Not especially. This post is still here because I'm feeling too lethargic to delete it, but the /r/xkcd moderator deleted most of the basilisk discussion on their recent thread because it violated their Rule 3, "Be Nice". This is a fine upstanding policy, and I fully agree with it. If there's one thing we can deduce about the motives of future superintelligences, it's that they simulate people who talk about Roko's Basilisk and condemn them to an eternity of forum posts about Roko's Basilisk. So far as official policy goes, go talk about it somewhere else. But in this special case I won't ban any RB discussion such that /r/xkcd would allow it to occur there. Sounds fair to me.

Comment author: shminux 23 November 2014 02:49:28AM 2 points [-]

Are you implying that the basilisk discussion is somehow censored on this forum?

Comment author: V_V 23 November 2014 12:03:30PM *  5 points [-]

It doesn't appear to be censored in this thread, but it was historically censored on LessWrong. Maybe EY finally understood the Streisand effect.

Comment author: Rukifellth 23 November 2014 04:03:32PM -1 points [-]

He might do it less for the "danger" and more for "bad discussion". The threads I see on /sci/ raising questions about high IQ come to mind.

Well, most threads I see on /sci/ come to mind.

Comment author: V_V 23 November 2014 06:01:54PM 3 points [-]

I don't read /sci/ therefore I don't understand what you mean.

Comment author: Rukifellth 25 November 2014 02:09:31AM 0 points [-]

Do you know of it?

Comment author: V_V 25 November 2014 02:01:09PM 1 point [-]

No, I've just found out that it is a board on 4chan.

Comment author: somnicule 26 November 2014 08:13:00AM 0 points [-]

Typical low-moderation problems. Repeated discussions of contentious but played-out issues like religion, IQ, status of various fields, etc. The basilisk is an infohazard in that sense at this point, IMO. It's fun to argue about, to the point of displacing other worthwhile discussion.

Comment author: V_V 26 November 2014 10:30:47AM *  2 points [-]

LessWrong also has low moderation. Why would the basilisk generate more trivial discussion than other topics?