Oh, so that's what "inline" reacts are! This brings me back: back in 2014, I wrote a prototype discussion forum (inspired by a weird sun Tweet) where you could upvote or downvote snippets within a post or comment, which would get correspondingly colored blue or red. The backend was Django, and the substring voting worked by traversing the DOM tree and working out the character indices where the current selection starts and ends. More innocent times! I miss jQuery.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Vestibulum id enim gravida, malesuada arcu non, feugiat massa. Donec tempus nisl quam, at sodales magna malesuada eget. Donec ipsum risus, feugiat vel purus quis, feugiat tempus mauris. Fusce sagittis elit tellus, ultrices maximus velit ultrices eu. Mauris fermentum ipsum vel sagittis dignissim. Sed vitae sem quis dui laoreet consectetur. Cras vel est quis velit imperdiet dignissim nec non metus. Morbi at ligula dolor.

Class aptent taciti sociosqu ad litora torquent per conubia nostra, per inceptos himenaeos. Aenean in sem at mauris euismod condimentum vel nec odio. Vivamus congue est non leo condimentum placerat. Cras interdum mauris quam, non elementum neque aliquet in. Pellentesque risus massa, aliquam id ante a, lobortis varius est. Aliquam erat volutpat. Proin diam augue, condimentum a metus ut, gravida ultrices ante. Cras eget bibendum purus, at finibus sem. Suspendisse suscipit sit amet leo a cursus. Sed et sem sit amet mi volutpat semper et a ante. Nullam sit amet tincidunt tellus, vitae cursus nunc. Etiam felis ligula, pretium at tellus eu, porta ultricies nisl. Pellentesque sed cursus eros.

Integer dictum tincidunt risus quis varius. Vestibulum erat dui, gravida et commodo et, dapibus faucibus tortor. Ut sit amet vulputate ipsum. Morbi at blandit nibh. Sed sagittis erat dui, eget placerat dui tincidunt sit amet. Sed ex diam, auctor ut aliquet sit amet, euismod sit amet nunc. Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia curae; Integer a tincidunt sem, in bibendum nunc. Cras vitae iaculis velit.

Suspendisse rhoncus interdum felis, et interdum turpis volutpat eu. Sed vitae justo scelerisque, suscipit justo in, ultricies lorem. Ut ut eleifend mauris. Praesent bibendum erat vel ligula rhoncus, sed porttitor augue pharetra. Aenean in condimentum sapien. Etiam feugiat sodales accumsan. Nam a cursus augue. Integer ullamcorper finibus nisl quis venenatis. Integer accumsan non magna id placerat. Nulla mollis sodales augue et fermentum.

Morbi et molestie nisi, sed mollis nisi. Donec iaculis velit at volutpat viverra. Morbi vehicula mollis lorem, id sagittis purus vulputate at. Vivamus feugiat tempus est, quis suscipit magna blandit ac. Nunc a convallis lectus, eget dapibus lectus. Vestibulum quis urna justo. Nulla tristique ut augue vitae vehicula. Cras condimentum et mauris vel dignissim. Phasellus ante dolor, sollicitudin vitae risus ut, volutpat molestie dui. Integer ex sem, ultrices in auctor eget, elementum non erat.

I'm surprised there's no tag for either "AI consciousness" or "AI rights", given that there have been several posts discussing both. However, there's a lot of overlap between the two, so perhaps both would be redundant, and the question of which is broader/more fitting becomes relevant. Thoughts?

(Sorry if this is not the right place to put this.)

Inline reactions aren't working for me in Firefox 88 on Xubuntu 16.04: when I select text, I can see the smiley icon next to the comment, but it disappears when I mouse over it.

This probably doesn't count as a bug report; while some companies need to support old software for a long time, in this case, I'm just imagining jimrandomh incredulously telling me, "Wait, you're running Firefox 88, on Xenial?! Why? What's wrong with you? You're a terrible person," and me not having any satisfactory reply.

I've just pushed an update to the Reacts Palette. I aimed to a) remove some reacts that either weren't getting used, or seemed to be used confusingly, b) add some reacts that seem missing, c) reorganize them so they were a bit easier to parse.

And, the biggest change is d) which is to mark how likely a claim is via reacting. I'm imagining this primarily used via inline-reacting. If a lot of people end up using it might make sense to build a more specialized system for this, but it seemed to cheap to add via Reacts for the immediate future.

It looks like this now, when you first open the palette. It deliberately doesn't emphasize the ability to scroll-for-more-reacts, at first, because I think people are probably already fairly overwhelmed with the default palette.

I like the dynamic of how the reacts make it easier to give positive feedback. 

When reading the recent UAP betting threat, I feel like I would want to have a react to congratulate people for taking their beliefs seriously enough to bet. 

Other intellectual communities often become specialized in analyzing arguments only of a very specific type, and because AGI-risk arguments aren't of that type, their members can't easily engage with those arguments. For example:

...if you look, say, at COVID or climate change fears, in both cases, there are many models you can look at, including--and then models with data. I'm not saying you have to like those models. But the point is: there's something you look at and then you make up your mind whether or not you like those models; and then they're tested against data. So, when it comes to AGI and existential risk, it turns out as best I can ascertain, in the 20 years or so we've been talking about this seriously, there isn't a single model done. Period. Flat out.

So, I don't think any idea should be dismissed. I've just been inviting those individuals to actually join the discourse of science. 'Show us your models. Let us see their assumptions and let's talk about those.' The practice, instead, is to write these very long pieces online, which just stack arguments vertically and raise the level of anxiety. It's a bad practice in virtually any theory of risk communication.

-- Tyler Cowen, Risks and Impact of Artificial Intelligence
 

is there a canonical source for "the argument for AGI ruin" somewhere, preferably laid out as an explicit argument with premises and a conclusion?

-- David Chalmers, Twitter

Is work already being done to reformulate AI-risk arguments for these communities?

Is there an organisation that can hire independent alignment researchers who already have funding, in order to help with visas for a place that has other researchers, perhaps somewhere in the UK? Is there a need for such an organisation?