Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

Comment author: gjm 15 September 2014 11:30:00AM 11 points [-]

These are 10 different propositions. Fortunately I disagree with most of them so can upvote the whole bag with a clear conscience, but it would be better for this if you separated them out.

Comment author: peter_hurford 15 September 2014 02:49:43PM 3 points [-]

I agree with this meta-comment. Should I downvote it?

Comment author: JoshuaFox 08 September 2014 02:45:38PM 10 points [-]

Can someone point me to estimates given by Luke Muehlhauser and others as to MIRI's chances for success in its quest to ensure FAI? I recall some values (of course these were subjective probability estimates with large error bars) in some lesswrong.com post.

Comment author: peter_hurford 11 September 2014 03:37:54PM 3 points [-]
Comment author: Gunnar_Zarncke 30 August 2014 02:48:03PM *  2 points [-]

They asked curious questions :-)

I mainly relayed what blob had reported of his polyphasic sleep experiment during the Berlin meetup. And I tried to summarize what I knew about polyphasic sleep from the links and LW in general.

I also relayed that my second oldes son (8) by himself developed strongly segmented sleep with siesta during winter but fell back into mostly normal sleep after two weeks.

Comment author: peter_hurford 31 August 2014 02:07:22AM *  2 points [-]


I mainly relayed what blob had reported of his polyphasic sleep experiment during the Berlin meetup

Any link or description of that?

Comment author: paper-machine 30 August 2014 03:46:19PM 1 point [-]

You're being uncharitable. "[It's] likely [that X]" doesn't exclude the possibility of non-X.

If you know nothing about a probability distribution, it is more likely that it has one absolute maximum than more than one.

Comment author: peter_hurford 31 August 2014 02:06:41AM 9 points [-]

Maybe I am being uncharitable, but when Sophronius asks "[c]an somebody explain to me why people generally assume that the great filter has a single cause?" and you reply "I don't think anyone really assumes that", I have to admit that I've always seen people think of the Great Filter in terms of one main cause (e.g., look to the poll in this thread where people choose one particular cause), and not in terms of multiple causes.

Though, you're right that no one has said that multiple causes is outright impossible. And you may be right that one main cause makes a lot more sense. But I do think Sophronius raises a question worth considering, at least a bit.

Comment author: paper-machine 30 August 2014 12:41:57PM 3 points [-]

I don't think anyone really assumes that.

Comment author: peter_hurford 30 August 2014 02:43:56PM 2 points [-]

From the article:

The real filter could be a combination of an early one and a late one, of course. But, unless the factors are exquisitely well-balanced, its likely that there is one location in civilizational development where most of the filter lies (ie where the probability of getting to the next stage is the lowest).

That doesn't sound like it admits the possibility of twelve, independent, roughly equally balanced filters.

Comment author: peter_hurford 30 August 2014 02:36:25PM 3 points [-]

What did people have to say about polyphasic sleep?

Comment author: Stuart_Armstrong 30 August 2014 08:28:36AM 11 points [-]

intelligent life is just so damn rare.

That's an early filter.

Comment author: peter_hurford 30 August 2014 02:34:27PM 2 points [-]

life, especially technological civilization, requires lots of heavy elements, which didn't exist too early in the universe, meaning only stars about the same generation as the Sun have chance to have it

Going off of this, what if life is somewhat common, but we're just one of the first life in the universe? That doesn't seem like an "early filter", so even if this possibility is really unlikely, it still would break your dichotomy.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 26 August 2014 06:44:31AM 6 points [-]

Has anyone tried doing EA outreach to Unitarians?

Comment author: peter_hurford 26 August 2014 03:38:53PM 4 points [-]
Comment author: peter_hurford 18 August 2014 10:47:44PM 3 points [-]

Could someone explain why I've been downvoted?

I didn't downvote you, but something that makes me refrain from engaging with your ideas more is the irony that your thoughts about becoming more organized are pretty disorganized.

Comment author: Lumifer 08 August 2014 04:28:07PM 4 points [-]

I'm personally against nearly all discussion of "what should a Friendly AI do?" because friendliness is a very poorly understood concept

What would be a good way to advance in our understanding of that concept, then?

Comment author: peter_hurford 08 August 2014 09:55:27PM 1 point [-]

I don't know. Discuss decision theory? Or ethics? Or something else? ...I don't think "what would friendly AI do?" (WWFAD) is a particularly useful line of thought, but I can't think of something sufficiently analogous yet useful to replace it with.

View more: Next