= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
For God's sake, if you want to remind yourself to do things, keep all your reminders in the same place. A reminder that you don't remember to look at is useless.
Oh, yes, I've agreed with you about that for a long time. The grandparent comment wasn't actually my (only) reminder.
In response to
Just One Sentence
Given the fuzziness, I'll just take it as an exercise in wit:
"LOCKSS: Lots Of Copies Keep Stuff Safe." They'll figure out the science. But we lost all scientific knowledge, I don't want that to happen twice.
"Rub dry wood until it makes like sun." Hopefully the taste of good steak will get them going.
In response to
CFAR’s Inaugural Fundraising Drive
(interested in hearing how other donors frame allocation between SI and CFAR)
I still only donate to SI. It's great that we can supposedly aim the money at FAI now, due to the pivot towards research.
But I would also love to see EY's appeal to MoR readers succeed:
I don’t work for the Center for Applied Rationality and they don’t pay me, but their work is sufficiently important that the Singularity Institute (which does pay me) has allowed me to offer to work on Methods full-time until the story is finished if HPMOR readers donate a total of $1M to CFAR.
Discussion
Upvoted for explaining how polls work.
Even if you can't divulge the password, you can still enter it... so if someone is actually in a position to coerce you, they're probably also in a position to make you enter the password for them. (It's damn hard to make an ATM that will give you your money when you want it, but also makes it impossible for someone to empty your account by waiting for you at the ATM and pointing a gun at you.)
And after skimming the paper, the only thing I could find in response to your point is:
Coercion detection. Since our aim is to prevent users from effectively transmitting the ability to authenticate to others, there remains an attack where an adversary coerces a user to authenticate while they are under adversary control. It is possible to reduce the effectiveness of this technique if the system could detect if the user is under duress. Some behaviors such as timed responses to stimuli may detectably change when the user is under duress. Alternately, we might imagine other modes of detection of duress, including video monitoring, voice stress detection, and skin conductance monitoring [8, 16, 1]. The idea here would be to detect by out-of-band techniques the effects of coercion. Together with in-band detection of altered performance, we may be able to reliably detect coerced users.
In response to
Questions on SI Research
How easily could the SI lose important data (like unpublished research) in, say, a fire or computer malfunction?
I have made the donation of $800 matched for wmorgan, atucker, Daniel Burfoot, and Barry Cotter. Thanks for participating everyone!
Thank you! And I just gave $200 to SI on top of the $50/month they automatically get from me.
In response to
New 'landing page' website: Friendly-AI.com
In FAQ #6:
Friendly AI is a problem of cognitive science.
I think this un-argued-for assertion makes the site seem (and be) less rigorous. Unfortunately, I can't think of a better concise justification for why FAI researchers should read about cognitive science.
In response to
New 'landing page' website: Friendly-AI.com
Nice!
From FAQ #5:
Independent researchers associated with the Singularity Institute: Daniel Dewey, Kaj Sotala, Peter de Blanc, Joshua Fox, Steve Rayhawk, and others
Would it be feasible to make this list exhaustive so that you can delete the "and others"? I think the "and others" makes the site seem less prestigious.
View more: Next
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
[Meta] Now I'm wondering why the OP is so heavily upvoted, for a meetup announcement. I'd be very surprised if this wasn't the highest-voted meetup post of all time, even.
I'm guessing RobertLumley's "Why would you downvote a meetup post?" caused people to upvote. I know I like to upvote when someone points out unnecessary-seeming downvotes.