I don't want to die. You don't want to die. The people who are potentially going to get us killed by pushing AI capability research don't want to die. Our most basic goals have been aligned all this time, so it's really tragic that we are in the situation we're...
It seems Deepmind is winning the AGI race. In the past, they negotiated with Google for having a nonprofit legal structure, but the proposal got totally rejected. They have an agreement that, if AGI is achieved, its control will rely on Deepmind's Ethics Board, which we know pretty much nothing...
I don't want to die.
You don't want to die.
The people who are potentially going to get us killed by pushing AI capability research don't want to die.
Our most basic goals have been aligned all this time, so it's really tragic that we are in the situation we're in right now. How did this happen?
First of all, it is a fact that people have differing opinions on how likely it is that AI will kill us all. Some think the probability is 99%+, and some others think it's something like 10%. But even the most optimistic capability researchers acknowledge that it's not 0.
If it's not 0, why are they taking the risk? Sure,... (read 501 more words →)
According to Eliezer, free will is an illusion, so Shane doesn't really have a choice.
Yeah, but let's be honest; oil barons don't think climate change is going to kill them. Capitalism may produce all sorts of coordination problems, but personal survival is still the strongest incentive. I think Google execs wouldn't hesitate to stop the research if they were expecting a paperclip maximizer.
You've deleted the first part of your comment cause you probably realized it didn't make much sense, but I'm going to answer to it anyway. You made a comparison between solving the alignment problem and predicting the price of a stock, and that's just not right. Google execs don't have to solve the alignment problem themselves, they just have to recognize its existence and its magnitude, in the same way that retail investors don't have to build the AGI themselves, they just have to notice that it's going to happen soon.
The efficient market hypothesis? Are you serious? So... you're saying the world is going to end and nobody is doing anything to avoid it, but I can't say that a stock is going to appreciate and nobody is buying.
Who are those latest people? Do you have any examples?
But he's not a doomer like you. Aren't you pissed at everyone who's not a doomer?
Fair enough. Have you already told Rohin Shah to go fuck himself?
Well, Google already has cash to build an AGI 20 times over. I don't think you can blame human extinction on average Joes who buy shares right before the end of the world.
May I know why?
It seems Deepmind is winning the AGI race. In the past, they negotiated with Google for having a nonprofit legal structure, but the proposal got totally rejected.
They have an agreement that, if AGI is achieved, its control will rely on Deepmind's Ethics Board, which we know pretty much nothing about. One would think it's very likely that Google will end up making a profit.
So... what do you think? Is Google stock the best investment a rationalist can make at this very moment, given the information that we have?
>There is no evidence that anti-aging is psychologically what's driving the AI race
Sure. As I've said, I'm just speculating. I think it's extremely hard to get evidence for this, since people don't talk openly about it. Those of us who admit publicly that we want to live forever (or indefinitely long) are excepcional cases. Even most people working in longevity will tell you that they don't care about increasing our lifespan, that they just want us to be healthier. Sam Altman will tell the media that he has no interest in living forever, that he just wants to "add 10 years of healthspan" (cause that's the moderate thing to say)... and then... (read more)