There is evidence, literal written evidence, of Musk trying to censor Grok from saying bad things about him

I'd like to see this

I wonder if maybe these readers found the story at that time as a result of first being bronies, and I wonder if bronies still think of themselves as a persecuted class.

These are not concepts of utility that I've ever seen anyone explicitly espouse, especially not here, the place to which it was posted.

The people who think of utility in the way the article is critiquing don't know what utility actually is, presenting a critque of this tangible utility as a critique of utility in general takes the target audience further away from understanding what utility is.

A Utility function is a property of a system rather than a physical thing (like, eg, voltage, or inertia, or entropy). Not being a simple physical substance doesn't make it fictional.

It's extremely non-fictional. A human's utility function encompasses literally everything they care about, ie, everything they're willing to kill for.

It seems to be impossible for a human to fully articulate what the human utility function is exactly, but that's just a peculiarity of humans rather than a universal characteristic of utility functions. Other agents could have very simple utility functions, and humans are likely to grow to be able to definitely know their utility function at some point in the next century.

Contemplating an argument that free response rarely gets more accurate results for questions like this because listing the most common answers as checkboxes helps respondents to remember all of the answers that're true for of them.

I'd be surprised if LLM use for therapy or sumarization is that low irl, and I'd expect people would've just forgot to mention those usecases. Hope they'll be in the option list this year.

Hmm I wonder if a lot of trends are drastically underestimated because surveyers are getting essentially false statistics from the Other gutter.

Apparently Anthropic in theory could have released claude 1 before chatgpt came out? https://www.youtube.com/live/esCSpbDPJik?si=gLJ4d5ZSKTxXsRVm&t=335

I think the situation would be very different if they had.

Were OpenAI also, in theory, able to release sooner than they did, though?

The assumption that being totally dead/being aerosolised/being decayed vacuum can't be a future experience is unprovable. Panpsychism should be our null hypothesis^[1], and there never has and never can be any direct measurement of consciousness that could take us away from the null hypothesis.

Which is to say, I believe it's possible to be dead.

1. ^{^}

   the negation, that there's something special about humans that makes them eligible to experience, is clearly held up by a conflation of having experiences and reporting experiences and the fact that humans are the only things that report anything.