Comment author: jschulter 06 July 2011 01:23:50AM 0 points [-]

I had a bit of car trouble, but I managed to get here get my coffee and the wifi password, and then realize I forgot a sign or anything of the kind. I'm sitting in the corner near the register if anybody happens to be waiting

In response to Open Problems
Comment author: XiXiDu 05 July 2011 11:34:47AM *  3 points [-]

A related post, 'Friendly AI Research and Taskification':

I don't even see how one would start to research the problem of getting a hypothetical AGI to recognize humans as distinguished beings. Solving this problem would seem to require as a prerequisite an understanding of the make up of the hypothetical AGI; something which people don't seem to have a clear grasp of at the moment. Even if one does have a model for a hypothetical AGI, writing code conducive to it recognizing humans as distinguished beings seems like an intractable task.

If the nature of ethical properties, statements, attitudes, and judgments does ultimately correlate with human brains, it might be possible to derive mathematical models of moral terms or judgments from brain data. The problem with arriving at the meaning of morality solely by means of contemplation is that you risk introducing new meanings based on high-order cognition and intuitions, rather than figuring out what humans as a whole mean by morality.

Two possible steps towards friendly AI/CEV (just some quick ideas):

1.) We want the AGI (CEV) to extrapolate our volition in a certain, ethical way. That is, it shouldn't for example create models of humans and hurt them just to figure out what we dislike. But in the end it won't be enough to write blog posts in English. We might have to put real people into brain scanners and derive mathematically precise thresholds for states like general indisposition and unethical behavior. Such models could then be implemented into the utility-function of an AGI, while blog posts written in natural language can't.

2.) We don't know if CEV is itself wished for and considered ethical by most humans. If you do not assume that all humans are alike, what makes you think that your personal solution, your answer to those questions will be universally accepted? A rich white atheist male living in a western country who is interested in topics like philosophy and mathematics does not seem to be someone who can speak for the rest of the world. If we are very concerned with the ethics of CEV in and of itself, we might have to come up with a way to execute an approximation of CEV before AGI is invented. We might need massive, large-scale social experiments and surveys to see if something like CEV is even desirable. Writing a few vague blog posts about it doesn't seem to get us the certainty we need before altering the universe irrevocably.

In response to comment by XiXiDu on Open Problems
Comment author: jschulter 05 July 2011 10:45:22PM 3 points [-]

If CEV encounters a large proportion of the population that wish it was not run and will continue to do so after extrapolation, it simply stops and reports that fact. That's one of the points of the method. It is, in and of itself a large scale social survey of present and future humanity. And if the groups that wouldn't want it run now would after extrapolation, I'm fine with running it against their present wishes, and hope that if I were part of a group under similar circumstances someone else would do the same- "past me" is an idiot, I'm not much better, and "future me" is hopefully an even bigger improvement, while "desired future me" almost certainly is.

Meetup : Southern Arizona meetup

2 jschulter 24 June 2011 01:21AM

Discussion article for the meetup : Southern Arizona meetup

WHEN: 05 July 2011 06:00:00PM (-0700)

WHERE: Coffee X Change 2443 North Campbell Avenue, Tucson, AZ 85719

I've decided to try and put together a stronger rationalist community here in Arizona; I know there have already been a few meetups up in Phoenix, and I'm hoping some of the attendees will be willing to migrate a bit. I managed to learn a few useful things at the rationality minicamp Singinst. held that I hope can make this community more enjoyable and connected. Date, time and exact location are still very adjustable, so tell me if you can make it, or if you would like to but need the details changed.

Discussion article for the meetup : Southern Arizona meetup

Comment author: sriku 11 May 2011 07:38:07AM 0 points [-]

Universities subscribe to these databases. There is a kind of redirection via a proxy that happens when I'm logged in via my univ's network which allows me to download articles as you mention. I do have to agree to a "I declare I won't violate copyrights" button before proceeding.

Its cool to be in school :)

Comment author: jschulter 12 May 2011 07:54:57AM 0 points [-]

I'm aware that the proxying service is available while I'm logged in, I was just misled by a cached login to believe that it was working without logging in, which would have been very odd, though beneficial. I've decided to update the comment to reflect that.

Comment author: rhollerith_dot_com 10 May 2011 11:27:05PM *  1 point [-]

I get, "Enter your NetID and Password." Have you considered the possibility that you have a cookie on your computer that eliminates the need for you to log in?

Comment author: jschulter 11 May 2011 02:35:19AM 0 points [-]

Okay, so there was some sort of fluke. I checked again and I did have to relogin; I'm guessing it was cached data rather than the cookie which stores my login, because other sites still failed to recognize me. Sorry for getting peoples hopes up,

Comment author: jschulter 11 May 2011 12:14:11AM 6 points [-]

But rationalism doesn’t have a well-defined set of norms/desirable skills to develop.

Actually changing your mind, learning the simple math of various fields,and becoming more luminous seem to represent a set of desirable skills to me, though I admit that is far from comprehensive. See also the twelve virtues of rationality.

Comment author: jschulter 10 May 2011 10:48:32PM *  1 point [-]

I may be experiencing a fluke, but it appears that my university's library's website allows any computer to use it as proxy for viewing and downloading articles from many paywalled sites (in fact, every site it gives me access to with my student login, which is a very large selection). I only discovered this by accident, and I'm hoping it isn't unintentional on their part. If anybody is interested, the address is here. If you try it and it doesn't work, please tell me.

ETA: It appears that my browser simply cached my login, and that this service is unfortunately not actually available to the general public. Sorry for any confusion.

Comment author: jschulter 01 May 2011 09:49:42AM 1 point [-]

I'll try and make it up; It's the weekend before finals start, but that likely wont be a problem.

Comment author: jschulter 09 May 2011 10:31:13AM 0 points [-]

Sorry I didn't make it. There were some last minute surprise Mother's day obligations.

Comment author: Dr_Manhattan 06 May 2011 11:23:25PM 1 point [-]

Just finished the Mote. Nice twist on evo-psych

Comment author: jschulter 07 May 2011 07:04:34AM 0 points [-]

I just recently found out about and obtained the sequels, and I have high hopes for them too.

Comment author: Skatche 06 May 2011 02:39:31AM 0 points [-]

Sorry, I have a bit of a skewed perspective about what's obvious. :P Once I perceived the connection to binary trees it seemed plain as day.

Comment author: jschulter 06 May 2011 06:14:35AM 2 points [-]

I find that for me, and many other people I know in the mathematics department of my university, once infinities, uncountability, and such enter the picture, the accuracy of intuition quickly starts to diminish, so it's wise to be careful and make sure the proof is complete before declaring it obvious. As a good example, note how surprising and notable Cantor's diagonal argument seemed the first time you heard it- it isn't obvious that the reals aren't countable when you don't already know that, so you might start trying to construct a counting scheme and end up with one that "obviously" works.

View more: Prev | Next