= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
eli_sennesh comments on Open thread, Nov. 09 - Nov. 15, 2015 - 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
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (175)
Why? I don't think UFAI can kill us in mere hours/minutes, and at some point during the months or years it will probably take, someone, somewhere, will notice what's going on. They probably wouldn't be able to stop it, but there's every chance it would become known.
And for my apparently abundant downvoters, the whole reason I'm asking to take bets is because some people repeatedly profess to believe precisely that every fresh machine-learning advancement is a dangerous step closer to a very sudden self-improving UFAI that destroys us all. So I'd like to find out their degrees of certainty regarding exactly how far machine learning can go before it crosses a classification boundary and becomes UFAI.
Anyway, I've got the first of several ANNABELL training sets being processed on a spare machine in the office.
By the standard of "someone somewhere noticing" we have proof that aliens are on earth. Nobody will take that as a way of resolving a bet.
A powerful UFAI can control cyberspace before it kills everyone. You would need cyberspace to function to resolve a bet.
It took a while after WWII till Italy's public recognized that the Mafia was back. An UFAI would make a mistake at waging infowar for it's identity to become public knowledge. If you believe that UFAI's would go FOOM then they are unlikely to make mistakes.
You get the downvotes because the average person who holds that belief has no reason to take the other side of the bet. Getting money on doomsday is not a valuable outcome.