Rationality Quotes July 2014

VAuroch

Another month, another rationality quotes thread. The rules are:

Please post all quotes separately, so that they can be upvoted or downvoted separately. (If they are strongly related, reply to your own comments. If strongly ordered, then go ahead and post them together.)
Do not quote yourself.
Do not quote from Less Wrong itself, HPMoR, Eliezer Yudkowsky, or Robin Hanson. If you'd like to revive an old quote from one of those sources, please do so here.
No more than 5 quotes per person per monthly thread, please.
Provide sufficient information (URL, title, date, page number, etc.) to enable a reader to find the place where you read the quote, or its original source if available. Do not quote with only a name.

Another month, another rationality quotes thread. The rules are:

Please post all quotes separately, so that they can be upvoted or downvoted separately. (If they are strongly related, reply to your own comments. If strongly ordered, then go ahead and post them together.)
Do not quote yourself.
Do not quote from Less Wrong itself, HPMoR, Eliezer Yudkowsky, or Robin Hanson. If you'd like to revive an old quote from one of those sources, please do so here.
No more than 5 quotes per person per monthly thread, please.
Provide sufficient information (URL, title, date, page number, etc.) to enable a reader to find the place where you read the quote, or its original source if available. Do not quote with only a name.

Chomsky’s response to a given international event is one of the most predictable phenomena I can think of—even the comets and the tides throw more curveballs. One could easily replace him with a chatbot.

Scott Aaronson.

EDIT: to clarify, if you can predict what a famous personality is going to say on a given topic well enough to replace it with a chatbot, listening to said personality on that topic no longer has much value.

I think Scott failed the inverse turing test. When reading his blockquote I would be quite confident in identifying that as something that Chomsky didn't write.

0V_V12y

I've heard that D-Wave quantum computer solves the P vs NP problem. I wonder what Scott Aaronson has to say about it. :D

2private_messaging12y

Valid moral judgement of "thousand eyes for an eye" actions is inherently pretty simple; if Scott is looking for something very sophisticated, he's not interested in morality. (One may have a sophisticated response to an eye for an eye situation, but a thousand eyes for an eye is pretty one sided when you do not feel affiliated with either group).

10

Rationality Quotes July 2014

10

10

10

Rationality Quotes July 2014

10

10