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.

ChristianKl comments on A few misconceptions surrounding Roko's basilisk - Less Wrong Discussion

39 Post author: RobbBB 05 October 2015 09:23PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (125)
Tags: roko blackmail roko's basilisk

Comments (125)

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

Comment author: V_V 10 October 2015 03:12:56PM *  0 points [-]

If you're saying 'LessWrongers think there's a serious risk they'll be acausally blackmailed by a rogue AI', then that seems to be false. That even seems to be false in Eliezer's case,

Is it?

Assume that:
a) There will be a future AI so powerful to torture people, even posthumously (I think this is quite speculative, but let's assume it for the sake of the argument).
b) This AI will be have a value system based on some form of utilitarian ethics.
c) This AI will use an "acausal" decision theory (one that one-boxes in Newcomb's problem).

Under these premises it seems to me that Roko's argument is fundamentally correct.

As far as I can tell, belief in these premises was not only common in LessWrong at that time, but it was essentially the officially endorsed position of Eliezer Yudkowsky and SIAI. Therefore, we can deduce that EY should have believed that Roko's argument was correct.

But EY claims that he didn't believe that Roko's argument was correct. So the question is: is EY lying?

His behavior was certainly consistent with him believing Roko's argument. If he wanted to prevent the diffusion of that argument, then even lying about its correctness seems consistent.

So, is he lying? If he is not lying, then why didn't he believe Roko's argument? As far as I know, he never provided a refutation.

Comment author: ChristianKl 10 October 2015 03:28:22PM -1 points [-]

So the question is: is EY lying?

His behavior was certainly consistent with him believing Roko's argument.

Lying is consistent with a lot of behavior. The fact that it is, is no basis to accuse people of lying.

Comment author: V_V 10 October 2015 03:59:40PM -1 points [-]

I'm not accusing, I'm asking the question.

My point is that to my knowledge, given the evidence that I have about his beliefs at that time, and his actions, and assuming that I'm not misunderstanding them or Roko's argument, then it seems that there is a significant probability that EY lied about not beliving that Roko's argument was correct.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit