Risky Machines: Artificial Intelligence as a Danger to Mankind
Unless you can do that with the raw poll data, but that just confused me.
Thankfully, the data is not quite that crippled! The data is reported in a... 'long' format, I think the term is, where each row is a single poll item response with a unique ID for the respondent. If you want to look at that sort of question, it's up to you to aggregate the data correctly (eg with grep). You can see this by looking at particular unique IDs, say that of Leonhart and anonymous respondent 11:
$ grep Leonhart poll.csv
"Leonhart","538","0","2013-07-14T21:05:29.027196"
"Leonhart","539","0","2013-07-14T21:05:29.118328"
"Leonhart","540","1","2013-07-14T21:05:29.292160"
"Leonhart","541","1","2013-07-14T21:05:29.244125"
"Leonhart","542","3","2013-07-14T21:05:29.178701"
$ grep \"11\" poll.csv
"11","538","0","2013-07-14T21:05:25.150240"
"11","539","2","2013-07-14T21:05:25.302881"
"11","540","0","2013-07-14T21:05:25.533486"
"11","541","1","2013-07-14T21:05:25.458408"
"11","542","2","2013-07-14T21:05:25.398273"
There's 5 entries for each, since there were 5 poll items, and and each poll item has its own unique ID as well. So if you wanted to know the relationship of an answer on poll item #538 and #541 based on how subjects answered #538, you'd get a list of everyone answered "0" in #538, and pull out their answer for #541 as well. That sort of thing.
(And now that I'm the topic, I wonder where my own writings fall, and how I would even know if I were insufficiently writing like Eliezer/Luke/Yvain.)
I like the your non-fiction style a lot (don't know your fictional stuff). I often get the impression you're in total control of the material. Very thorough yet original, witty and humble. The exemplary research paper. Definitely more Luke than Yvain/Eliezer.
That one's in progress, I think.
Also, to reply to a comment elsewhere in thread, obviously penalties are not going to be charged retrospectively if an ancestor later goes to -3. Nobody has proposed this. Navigating the LW rules is not intended to require precognition.
Navigating the LW rules is not intended to require precognition.
Well, it was required when (negative) karma for Main articles increased tenfold.
What I want to know is whether you are one of those who thinks no superintelligence could talk them out in two hours, or just no human. If not with a probability of literally zero (or perhaps one for the ability of a superintelligence to talk its way out), approximately what.
Regardless, let's do this some time this month. As far as betting is concerned, something similar to the original seems reasonable to me.
What I want to know is whether you are one of those who thinks no superintelligence could talk them out in two hours, or just no human. If not with a probability of literally zero (or perhaps one for the ability of a superintelligence to talk its way out), approximately what.
Regardless, let's do this some time this month. As far as betting is concerned, something similar to the original seems reasonable to me.
To be more specific:
I live in Germany, so timezone is GMT +1. My preferred time would be on a workday sometime after 8 pm (my time). Since I'm a german native speaker, and the AI has the harder job anyway, I offer: 50 dollars for you if you win, 10 dollars for me if I do.
Disagree with the premise. New movies tend to have more plot holes, less characterization and worse writing. Improved effects only rarely make up that margin. I also find the following stories just as plausible as yours: "New movies are over-represented on the IMDB top 250 because they get bolstered by excited fans who just saw the film and haven't yet taken the time to digest the movie or see how it dates and who, often, haven't seen the old movies on the list." The Return of the King is not better than Blade Runner.
/done with my silly arguing for the day.
I agree in large parts, but it seems likely that value drift plays a role, too.
What I want to know is whether you are one of those who thinks no superintelligence could talk them out in two hours, or just no human. If not with a probability of literally zero (or perhaps one for the ability of a superintelligence to talk its way out), approximately what.
Regardless, let's do this some time this month. As far as betting is concerned, something similar to the original seems reasonable to me.
Well, I'm somewhat sure (80%?) that no human could do it, but...let's find out! Original terms are fine.
there may be a way to constrain a superhuman AI such that it is useful but not dangerous...Can a superhuman AI be safely confined, and can humans managed to safely confine all superhuman AIs that are created?
Does anyone think that no AI of uncertain Friendliness could convince them to let it out of its box?
I'm looking for a Gatekeeper.
Why doesn't craigslist have a section for this in the personals? "AI seeking human for bondage roleplay." Seems like it would be a popular category...
I'd bet up to fifty dollars!?
View more: Next
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
Using early IA techniques is probably risky in most cases. Commited altruists might have a general advantage here.