Comment author: James_Miller 01 September 2016 02:19:59PM 1 point [-]

I have literally offered this. When writing for Better Investing Magazine I interviewed a company that one of my students was working for about some project (which I think involved e-payments) my student was working on. During the interview the person I was talking with inadvertently said something that could have been interpreted negatively and he paused. I said something like "don't worry I would never write a story that would hurt my student" and the interview went on. This kind of thing might be commonplace.

Comment author: torekp 29 August 2016 10:23:30PM 1 point [-]

Can you please clarify "our reference class"? And are you using some form of Self-Sampling Assumption?

Comment author: James_Miller 30 August 2016 04:21:39AM 1 point [-]

It's meant to be vague and you are right to call me on it.

Comment author: Prometheus 27 August 2016 05:15:12AM 0 points [-]

It could be the universe is only "old" by our standards. Maybe a few trillion years is a very young universe by normal standards, and it's only because we've been observing a simulation that it seems to be an "old" universe.

Comment author: James_Miller 27 August 2016 06:02:31AM 0 points [-]

This is certainly possible. But if we are in a simulation of the base universe then it's strange that we experience the Fermi paradox given the universe's apparent age.

Comment author: James_Miller 26 August 2016 04:12:10PM -9 points [-]

Could the administrators create protected accounts that could be up-voted but not down-voted?

Comment author: vinceguilligan 22 August 2016 10:53:27PM 2 points [-]

There are other posibilites not discussed here: We may be the creation of aliens, and they may have contact with humanity but with little intervention.

Comment author: James_Miller 23 August 2016 12:59:57AM 1 point [-]

If the zoo hypothesis is correct then aliens are massively interfering with us by giving us a false understanding of the fate of life in the universe sort of like if a doctor falsely tells a patient that everyone with the patient's condition has died. The patient might engage in risky activities that he otherwise wouldn't have.

Comment author: turchin 22 August 2016 09:45:32PM 2 points [-]

The one possible way to argue against this grim perspective is to suggest that probability is distorted by simulation argument. If at least one super AI will be created it will create millions of simulations (to numerically solve Fermi paradox, e.g.) and it will overweight the number of real civilization. But will it save them from the said black hole?

Comment author: James_Miller 23 August 2016 12:55:41AM 1 point [-]

Then the Fermi simulation paradox is "why is the universe so old?" If the universe gets quickly colonized then most of the simulations of civilizations that have not yet made contact with aliens will have universes much younger than ours.

Comment author: turchin 22 August 2016 08:01:46PM 3 points [-]

Really interesting turn. As I understand you mean that in some universes UFAI will eat almost all matter quickly, and there will be not much other earth-like civilization, but in other universes with late non-AI filter there will be more instances of earth-like civilizations.

So, if yes, what could be such filter? It should be a property of the universe it self, not a civilization, so probably it should be some think like black hole catastrophe in hadron collider? (It also should be local, not the false vacuum transition for the same reasons). Or simple runaway global warming? But it is not universal enough.

Comment author: James_Miller 22 August 2016 09:29:35PM 3 points [-]

Yes, this is what I mean. Part of what makes it an effective filter might be that it's hard to detect. If it's a "black hole catastrophe in hadron collider" then its technologically much easier to build the collider than to realize that the collider will create a black hole. I've suggested that this kind of possibility should cause us to put lots of resources into looking for the ruins of dead alien civilizations.

Comment author: James_Miller 22 August 2016 07:32:21PM 6 points [-]

Excellent. My personal theory is that the universe is fine-tuned for both life and for the Fermi paradox with a late great filter because across the multiverse most lifeforms such as us will exist in such universes in part because without a great filter intelligent life will quickly turn into something not in our reference class and then use all the resources of their universe and so make their universe inhospitable to life in our reference class.

Comment author: HungryHobo 11 August 2016 11:38:58AM 5 points [-]

There's about 3200 species of mosquito. < 200 bite humans and perhaps a dozen are major disease vectors for humans.

We extinct about 150 species per day without really trying. Increasing the number of species we push to extinction by 10% for a single day would save half a million lives per year.

Comment author: James_Miller 21 August 2016 04:30:24AM 1 point [-]

These are important comparisons.

Comment author: gwern 19 August 2016 08:40:42PM 4 points [-]

You would, at the very least, be in violation of several acts regarding approval of GMOs: https://www.loc.gov/law/help/restrictions-on-gmos/usa.php https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_the_release_of_genetically_modified_organisms#United_States Specifically, you'd be violating FDA requirements by releasing '“new animal drugs” (NADs)' without approval. Depending on whether mosquitoes are considered plant pests, it looks like you'd also be violating Department of Agriculture laws. I assume you'd probably also be violating a number of EPA laws but didn't see anything specifically about that.

Comment author: James_Miller 19 August 2016 08:54:18PM 1 point [-]

Couldn't you get around these laws by either (a) releasing the mosquitoes outside of the U.S. or (b) creating and releasing them outside of the U.S.?

View more: Prev | Next