Definition of Rational Atheist - considers probability of God at ~5%.
Row Labels Average of PGod StdDev of PGod Count of PGod
Agnostic 17,20 22,13 130
Atheist and not spiritual 3,27 10,15 958
Atheist but spiritual 7,95 19,66 129
Committed theist 75,07 34,40 47
Deist/Pantheist/etc. 41,24 36,04 19
Lukewarm theist 48,09 34,61 39
(blank) 3,67 5,51 3
Grand Total 9,96 22,90 1 325
I see possible reason for pain and suffering in the world - we are simulated for torture...
In thought experiment (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_suicide_and_immortality) it says: "Barring life after death, it is not possible for the experimenter to experience having been killed, thus the only possible experience is one of having survived every iteration". QM IMHO does not say about afterlife, so afterlife takes care of Quantum Torment.
Nope, it's referring to "AI-box" experiments where one (human) participant is role-playing the AI role. No actual AI participation is in any way implied here.
Thank you.
I would expect rationalists be more careful with words, why not phrase as played AI role to be clear?
Considering
P Simulation 24.31 + 28.2
per last survey, there is significant probability I was AI yesterday.
I don't understand:
393 answer “yes” to at least one mental illness question. Lower bound: 26.1% of the LW population is mentally ill. Gosh, we have a lot of self-diagnosers.
Depression Yes, I was formally diagnosed: 273, 18.2% Yes, I self-diagnosed: 383, 25.5% No: 759, 50.5% *
The question above is one option, so for depression only self+notself 383+273 = 656, how come 393 lower bound?
AI reading LessWrong - will we find out soon?
Question number 90. Have you ever practiced not letting an AI out of the box? Choose one of the following answers Yes with Eliezer's Ruleset, Yes with Tuxedage's Ruleset, Yes with a different ruleset, No but I've been the AI, No
Option "No but I've been the AI" is of particular interest to me. I'm not native English speaker and I don't know how strongly "ve been" implies that the state is changed as of now.
My guess is that the survey tries to find out if some of the following is true:
1) There was AI who already became "natural" intelligence (maybe human, maybe Extra-Terrestial)
2) There was AI who had access to Time machine to read LessWrong in our present time.
Any other guesses?
P.S. I've searched LessWrong site for "No but I've been the AI" and found nothing, so the issue has not been discussed yet and I have not noted humor in questions of the survey, so I conclude interest of the question is genuine.
Being stupid or ugly is not quite the same as being color-blind or spirituality-blind because stupidity and ugliness have a more direct impact on your reproductive fitness,
And because stupidity have more direct impact on IQ score, uglyness on actor profession opportunities, color-blind on painter options and spirituality-blindness on inner feeling of well-being perhaps?
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
[Survey Taken Thread]
Let's make these comments a reply to this post. That way we continue the tradition, but keep the discussion a bit cleaner.
I have taken the survey. It was interesting, thanx to those who made it!