All of Andrew Vlahos's Comments + Replies

Answer by Andrew Vlahos2-8

If that was the case we would be doomed far worse than if alignment was extremely hard. It's only because of all the writing that people like Eliezer have done talking about how hard it is and how we are not on track, plus the many examples of total alignment failures already observed in existing AIs (like these or these), that I have any hope for the future at all.

Remember, the majority of humans use as the source of their morality a religion that says that most people are tortured in hell for all eternity (or, if an eastern religion, tortured in a Naraka... (read more)

2Aleksi Liimatainen
You're describing an alignment failure scenario, not a success scenario. In this case the AI has been successfully instructed to paperclip-maximize a planned utopia (however you'd do that while still failing at alignment). Successful alignment would entail the AI being able and willing to notice and correct for an unwise wish.

This actually isn't true: nuclear power was already becoming cheaper than coal and so on, and improvements have been available. The problem is actually regulatory: Starting at around 1970 various reasons have caused the law to make even the same tech to become MUCH more expensive. This was avoidable and some other countries like France managed to make it keep going cheaper than alternative sources. This talks about it in detail. Here's a graph from the article:Devanney Figure 7.11: USA Unit cost versus capacity. From P. Lang, “Nuclear Power Learning and Deployment Rates: Disruption and Global Benefits Forgone” (2017)

3bhauth
I have seen that post and others like it, and that incorrect view is what I'm arguing against here. The plot you're posting, cost vs cumulative capacity, shows that learning with cumulative capacity built happened for a while and then stopped being relevant; that doesn't contradict my point. Nuclear power in France, when including subsidies, wasn't exceptionally cheap, and was driven largely by the desire for nuclear weapons to deter a Soviet invasion using small nukes and lots of tanks in Europe and the threat of ICBMs to prevent the US from participating. Which is a thing that was planned. BTW, the French nuclear utility EDF is building Hinkley Point C, and it's not particularly cheap.
3Thomas Sepulchre
From the same paper: Inflation doesn't explain a tenfold increase between ~1967 and ~1975. Regardless, this graph is in 2010$ so inflation doesn't explain anything. I agree with @Andrew Vlahos that inflation doesn't explain the trend.

I'd love to do this, but would have a hard time paying out because, for reasons beyond my control and caused by other people's irrationality, I'm on SSI (although that might change in a few years). In the US people can't save more than $2000 in liquid assets without losing their benefits, so I can't take much, and probably wouldn't be able to pay out because every transaction must be justified to the government, and although small purchases for entertainment would go through I'd have a hard time defending paying $1000 or whatever on a bet. Also, I've tried... (read more)

Yes! Finally someone gets it. And this isn't just from things that people consider bad, but from what they consider good also. For most of my life "good" meant what people talk about when they are about to make things worse for everyone, and it's only recently that I had enough hope to even consider cryonics, thinking that anyone having power over me would reliably cause situation worse than death regardless of how good their intentions were.

Elieser is trying to code in a system of ethics that would remain valid even if the programmers are wrong about impo... (read more)

Actually I posted a comment below the article, quoting an Alcor representative's clarification: 

"Most Members submit a Statement of Revival Preferences document to state your expectations upon revival.

Alcor cannot guarantee that it will be followed since it will be many years into the future before you are revived.

I have attached the document for your review." (and the document was very detailed)

So Alcor says that they actually are willing to do this and are trying, although they of course can't guarantee that society won't in the future decide to force revive people against their will anyway.

2Mati_Roy
ah, yeah that's true, I did know that actually. What some of the people I know want though is to be thawed after a certain condition rather than simply not being reanimated, and ir I remember correctly, when I asked Alcor, they said they couldn't do that. Conditions included AI progress and family not being preserved (or somethings along those lines)

New update: I can't do this anyway because I'm getting partial disability (Social Security Supplemental Income) and Rudi Hoffman said insurance companies won't insure people who get any disability payments, even if they have a job. I can't even save up for it slowly because in the US people on SSSI are forbidden from saving more than $2,000 in funds (reason: bureaucratic stupidity) and although I can save by putting money into an ABLE account (which has its own bureaucratic complications) the limit is $100,000 which might not be enough if prices adjust for... (read more)

An Alcor representative clarified the point:

"Most Members submit a Statement of Revival Preferences document to state your expectations upon revival.

Alcor cannot guarantee that it will be followed since it will be many years into the future before you are revived.

I have attached the document for your review."

So I guess this is already being done

1Andrew Vlahos
New update: I can't do this anyway because I'm getting partial disability (Social Security Supplemental Income) and Rudi Hoffman said insurance companies won't insure people who get any disability payments, even if they have a job. I can't even save up for it slowly because in the US people on SSSI are forbidden from saving more than $2,000 in funds (reason: bureaucratic stupidity) and although I can save by putting money into an ABLE account (which has its own bureaucratic complications) the limit is $100,000 which might not be enough if prices adjust for inflation before I have enough. :( Cryptocurrency won't fix this: I've tried crypto before and got scammed, so it can't be trusted even if the government doesn't catch me trying to evade the law. Something really frustrating is that the reason I'm even on disability in the first place is because of society's insanity.

Actually I think you did understand my post. What I'm confused about is that I wanted to have the option to specify "I don't want to be brought back unless X and Y", I asked them and they said they wouldn't allow me to do this, and you said that they did allow you to do this. I asked a few years ago and got a similar answer.

Could someone else who signed up for Alcor reply to this and say if they got something like that?

2PeterMcCluskey
I signed up with Alcor 26 years ago. I'm fairly sure they had a free-form field for preferences about when and how I'd want to be brought back. I think the Alcor employee that I talked to about the form had some odd conditions on when he should be brought back, something like not until the fidelity of revival reached some theoretical perfection.
2niplav
It's been a while since I looked at the form, and perhaps my memory is incorrect and it only allows for restricted choices (such as upload vs. not upload). In this case I trust your memory more than mine.

But I asked Alcor specifically if something like this would be possible, and they said that it wouldn't be. (Along with CI)

2niplav
Oh, interesting. Then I probably misunderstood your post, apologies.

Not me. However, I thought of that part in Dr. Seuss where someone watches a bee to make it more productive, someone watches that watcher to make him more productive, someone watches him and so on.For all the busy bees, and all the watch watchers | tabitha ...

Social media could be a factor, but a much bigger one is that kids are so ludicrously overcontrolled all day every day that they often get no opportunity for good experiences.

My childhood was much closer to Comazotz from A Wrinkle in Time than to a healthy upbringing.

Yeah, portions are way too big now. I'm 6 feet, 4 inches tall. Having two meals per day is quite enough for me, I only order one thing when I go to restaurants and I'm always too full to eat dessert. If I was a normal height and tried eating three meals per day, I would definitely be too fat.

(To be clear, I'm in the US. It's extreme portion sizes get commentary from visiting europeans

Answer by Andrew Vlahos10

Not quite what you asked, but there's a post: "The Best Textbooks on Every Subject" that seems like it can help.

5the gears to ascension
those are from 2011, before alexnet. good idea, but it could use some serious updating.

There are three big problems with this idea. 

First, we don't know how to program an AI to value morality in the first place. You said "An AI that was programmed to be moral would..." but programming the AI to do even that much is the hard part. Deciding which morals to program in would be easy by comparison.

Second, this wouldn't be a friendly AI. We want an AI that doesn't think that it is good to smash Babylonian babies against rocks or torture humans in Hell for all of eternity like western religions say, or torture humans in Naraka for 10^21 years ... (read more)

1mk54
1. This is obviously hand waving away a lot of engineering work.  But, my point is that assigning a non-zero probability of god existing  may effect an AIs behavior in very dramatic ways.  An AI doesn't have to be moral to do that. See the example with the paperclip maximizer. 2. In the grand scheme of things I do think a religious AI would be relatively friendly. In any case, this is why we need to think seriously about the possibility. I don't think anyone is studying this as an alignment issue. 3. I'm not sure I understand Eliezer's claim in that post.  There's a distinction between saying you can find evidence against religion being true (which you obviously can) and saying that religion can be absolutely disproven. Which it cannot. There is a non zero probability that one (or more) religions is true.

Yes it did, it's clear that my prediction was wrong

This is true, although I don't think you'll get much interest about this because it's so obvious.

1M. Y. Zuo
With four comments within the first few hours my post appears to have received more interest than the large majority of posts within recent years on LW.  Especially since I posted it outside of normal waking hours in North America.

This isn't from Christianity, but actually goes back to hunter-gatherers and had a useful function. See this description of "insulting the meat". https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/freedom-learn/201105/how-hunter-gatherers-maintained-their-egalitarian-ways

(to be clear, I'm not sure whether this still has a useful function or not)

Answer by Andrew Vlahos60

https://waitbutwhy.com/2019/08/giants.html has a pretty convincing (to me) explanation of this. Basically the way human psychology works is that people have conflicts at the highest available struggle, and when no outside enemies are a threat they turn internally. For a nice graphical illustration, skip to "Me against my brothers; my brothers and me against my cousins; my cousins, my brothers, and me against strangers."

5Jalex S
It's a piece of fiction about someone using a funky language model tool to write autobiographical fiction.

It would help. However, Twitter makes money based on energetic engagement, and no emotion drives behavior better than rage, so they don't want to fix it.

It's like the situation with phone companies. There actually are effective ways to prevent spoofed phone numbers, according to my dad who works at a telecom company. However, since scammers and telemarketers are by far the biggest customers, phone companies won't make the changes needed to do this.

4lc
Correct. Although you don't even need the dislike button to fix OP's problems; Twitter has the view:like ratio and can solve it themselves. This is part of why buying Twitter to altruistically run it as a public service seems to me like a pretty effective technique, except for the tens of billions of dollars you'd be "burning" as tribute to twitter execs in order to accomplish it.

No. Humans do major harm to each other, often even when they are trying to help. And that's if things go right; an AI based on human behavior has a high chance of causing harm deliberately.

I tried a long time ago and it didn't work

I'm a tutor, and I've noticed that when students get less sleep they make many more minor mistakes (like dropping a negative sign) and don't learn as well. This effect is strong enough that for a couple of students I started guessing how much sleep they got the last couple days at the end of sessions, asked them, and was almost always right. Also, I've tried at one point going on a significantly reduced sleep schedule with a consistent wakeup time, and effectiveness collapsed. I soon burned out and had to spend most of a day napping to catch up on sleep.

At this point I do think enough sleep is important, and have a different hypothesis that needed sleep is just different for different people. 

-2guzey
Yep, if someone was majorly undersleeping for a few days, they are probably going to be more sleepy and make more mistakes of attention/find it more difficult to concentrate and absorb the kind of information that they would need a tutor to absorb! As an experiment -- you can ask a couple of your students to take a coffee heading to you when they are underslept and see if they continue to make mistakes and learn poorly (in which case it's the lack of sleep per se likely causing problems) or not (in which case it's sleepiness)
3NormanPerlmutter
Anecdotal, but similar -- when I used to play in chess tournaments, I had a sense that I performed better and made fewer errors when I had more sleep, to the point of aiming for 9 or so hours of sleep the night before a tournament.

Yeah, let the people go.

Seriously. My childhood was hellish largely to the "education" and the extreme control and supervision that free-range kids blogs often talk about. I was thinking of signing up for cryonics and had actually started filling out the paperwork, but seeing these forcibly done to adults too even after the vaccine came out changed my mind. 

About the 3-year-old cancer researcher:

Foldit is a video game about realistically-folding amino acids. When scientists had trouble figuring out how amino acids form into proteins, Foldit players actually had better results than the best computer simulations.

3 is probably a bit too young, but projects like this would be really useful.

I don't know what they are like. Should I bring anything? It starts at noon, but how long does it last?

It says no man has the right to interrupt the happiness of another and talks about property rights, but also says "Whatever is inconsistent with the general peace & welfare of mankind is inconsistent with the laws of human nature and therefore wrong".

What would Wollaston say about heroin dealers? Is it right or wrong to prevent them from dealing heroin?

woah, birth control is way more complicated than I thought. I started looking and it turns out I can't just read a bunch of studies about each method and say what the side effect risks are. There are quite a lot of birth control methods and chemicals, each with tons of complicated chemical interactions, tons of complicated hormonal interactions, side effects, etc. Each article talks about lots of fancy biological terms like "venous thrombosis" that I have to keep looking up. I also don't really have the medical knowledge to really put things in scale: for ... (read more)

2Yoav Ravid
Other useful tools: Connected Papers Semantic Scholar  

actually never mind. I don't have a university or anything that gives access to journals, sci-hub doesn't have a convenient search tool, and arxiv doesn't have enough articles about this topic

You can search on scholar.google.com (if normal google isn't good enough) and get them from scihub/libgen.

I'd be interested, but you say that the payment "depending on the post, it might also end up (much) lower". Also, I haven't done any research into this before, and would have a lot of reading to do, and so someone else would probably do it first.

Have you already had volunteers, and could you elaborate on the payment?

5Chi Nguyen
Sorry for replying so late! I was quite busy this week. * I initially wanted to commission someone and expected that I'd have to pay 4 digits. Someone suggested I put down a bounty. I'm not familiar with putting bounties on things and I wanted to avoid getting myself in a situation where I feel like I have to pay the full amount for * work that's poor * work that's decent but much less detailed than I had envisioned * multiple reports each * I think I'm happy to pay the full amount for a report that is * transparent in its reasoning, so I can trust it, * tells me how much to trust study results, e.g., describes potential flaws and caveats for the studies they looked at, * roughly on the level of detail that's indicated by what I wrote under "the type of content I would like to see included". Ideally, the person writing wouldn't treat my list as a shopping list, but use their common sense to include the things I'd be interested in * the only report of this type that claims the bounty * The first two are the most important ones. (And the last one is weird) If It's much less detailed, but fulfills the other criteria, I'd still be happy to pay triple digit. * As you're later comment says, I think this is a pretty complex topic, and I can imagine that £2000 wouldn't actually cover the work needed to do such a report well. I think before someone seriously puts time into this, they should probably just contact me. Both to spare awkward double work + submissions. And to set expectations on the payment. I'll edit my post to be clearer on this.
1Andrew Vlahos
actually never mind. I don't have a university or anything that gives access to journals, sci-hub doesn't have a convenient search tool, and arxiv doesn't have enough articles about this topic

Not really helpful for understanding the history of factory safety, but here's a funny German workplace safety video, Forklift Driver Klaus: (note, you do not need to speak german)

1Dojan
Klaus was my first thought too! I found this when I first got my Forklift license :P
8gwern
It's a great video. Even has its own WP article!

That was extremely interesting and relevant, thanks!

Alex is correct about water. People can go weeks without food but only days without water, so if there's a crisis water is the most important.

I'm not a general prepper, but if an earthquake breaks a bunch of water pipes or something it might take a few days to fix things.

Can you give an example of this happening in the real world? I don't quite see what it applies to.

3Teerth Aloke
Narrow AI and General AI may be the sort of thing in mind.

Decisions about covid policy have been mostly political, but vaccines weren't political before that. Consider smallpox. Smallpox was all over the world and apparently unbeatable. It was described in China in 340. George Washington and Abraham Lincoln got it, and if they died history could have gone way differently. https://rootsofprogress.org/smallpox-and-vaccines. It was just a thing that sometimes happened to people, and nothing could be done about it. Suddenly, as soon as vaccines were applied to a region. Smallpox was completely eliminated there.

A simi... (read more)

Answer by Andrew Vlahos10

I wrote about this from a retrospective perspective already. "If computer power is the only thing standing between us and the singularity then we will finally have enough computer power... a decade ago." Humans have a slight advantage in compute architecture now, but I doubt that's enough to overcome computers' other advantages.

https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/m5rvZBKyMRtFo53wZ/hardware-is-already-ready-for-the-singularity-algorithm

How would students police that, exactly? Could you elaborate?

Also, coordination was tried, like when I made a deal with a friend named Griffin to do a homework exchange, but parents shut that down because that's considered plagiarism and "cheating is wrong".

1Dave Lindbergh
By policing that, I mean if the students don't get the graded homework back in 48 hours, they can complain to administrators and parents, who can pressure the teacher. This assumes the administrators decide to make and enforce the 48 hour rule. Re coordination, I've seen kids using "group chat" on Facebook or similar. In some schools (good ones) it seems to be de rigueur.
8[anonymous]
I occasionally did homework swaps, and more often let friends copy off me. Such practices were rampant at my school, and I went to a small nerd high school. Your mistake was letting anyone except the person involved know about the trade.

I'm in the US, not UK (sorry for not clarifying). Maybe homework is functional there, and if so, great, but that isn't what happens here. Also, I wish homework was a bit of retrieval practice on past content, but it's not

2gjm
Another UK data point: my daughter is in secondary school (= high school), not in a public-exam year. The school's officially stated policy is that pupils in her year should expect 1.5-2.5 hours of homework per day. At no point has she been set anywhere near that much. The typical total is more like half an hour per day. (She's very bright and it's hard to know for sure how much time it's meant to take; I'm guessing based on what she tells me.) I'm fairly sure this varies a lot from school to school, even if we hold fixed what country, public-versus-private, etc.

Not quite, since although it never went that far, there was a legitimate concern that I could get killed. Also, l needed to show a specific example of a bully taking the extra effort to do extra harm, and giving a real example would be, well, problematic.

2Pattern
TL:DR; I was talking about selection bias from you still being alive (I assume). My point was that, given that the protagonist of Worm almost died, probabilistically, most people won't have experienced that level of bullying, unless we include dead people in 'people who have experienced' because there's a selection effect from being alive. Conditioning on survival*, probabilistically selects against more extreme torture, and towards none at all. At the limit, no one survives, and thus everyone who is alive has experienced such things with probability zero. *For more exact numbers, look at the SSC link, and see if they investigate at a finer level that 'was or wasn't bullied'. Alternatively, just review the statistics and compare the rates of survival implied by this:
1orthogenesis
Also, l needed to show a specific example of a bully taking the extra effort to do extra harm, and giving a real example would be, well, problematic. I think also that any bully who goes far enough to do something really bad gets called other things and becomes a non-central example of a bully (e.g. a bully that resorts to murder is labelled a murderer, not a bully). It seems bully often evokes images of doing mean-but-not-to-the-point-of criminal things where laws get involved and where the label on a kid shifts from bully to juvenile delinquent, even if the non-illegal things are still bad and traumatizing to victims.

Good point, I didn't consider statistical bundling.

Actually, I don't think statistical bundling is a commonly recognized term, but I see the use of it now.

Answer by Andrew Vlahos10

I don't think there is a term, and don't think there needs to be one. If someone else disagrees with me that's fine, but situations where 

1: you can consistently do far better than average by doing system B in a certain way

2: most people who use system B do worse

are so rare that it doesn't need a term. Unless you can think of several specific examples?

5Ericf
Examples: 1. Pitching overhand vs sidearm in baseball. 2. Net decking vs custom building in Magic The Gathering (before 2010) 3. Buying index funds vs picking stocks (after doing Berkshire Hathaway levels of research) 4. Not gambling vs playing blackjack (as part of a card-counting bet-variance team) 5. Shooting a basketball from the floor vs dunking (if you're tall enough) In general: Doing things the same way that worked in the past vs doing something different. Most mutations are deleterious, but doing things in the correct different way can have big benefits.
6Viliam
A specific example: how safe is it to use a condom? When you look at the statistics of pregnancies per user per year, it is important to understand that a person who says "uhm, I usually use condoms, but I kinda forget to put one on at 50% of occassions" is still classified as a condom-user. So the safety for you is probably much better than the statistics suggests. Another example: homeschooling. Seems to me there are essentially two types of homeschooling families: smart conscientious people who want to give their kids better education than the school system typically provides; and religious or other fanatics who want to protect their kids from exposure to sinful information. If you consider homeschooling your kids and look at statistics, it is important to realize that they are based on the average of these two groups, so your chances are better. In both cases, the problem with looking at statistics for group B is that the group B has a big variance, and you have a good reason to believe you are much better than the average of B. (The group A may be better on average, but maybe it has much smaller variance, or maybe just you personally don't have the same kind of advantage in A that you have in B.)

You missed my main reason for avoiding spoilers. It's not because something is intended a certain way or that I think it would train rationality better to not do something, it's because doing things myself is way more fun than having things done for me. I found trying to figure out how to solve a rubix cube myself to be way more fun than being told would have been. (Or figuring out the villain's plot before the monologue, or whatever).

I suggest reading the "Fun theory" sequence.

1chemslug
Thanks for the pointer.  There's more there than I remembered.  I originally bounced off that sequence after this post, where EY spends a lot of time worrying about whether there will be enough math puzzles to go around after the singularity.  I remember thinking that his conception of fun was so far from mine that there wasn't much point in continuing.  Maybe I should revisit that conclusion.

What if it's just regression to the mean? Maybe the main problem wasn't that late Rome was unusally bad, but that Rome at it's peak was anomalously successful, and this didn't last because technology and culture just wasn't able to sustain an anomaly at the time?

Most lies are bad, but there are circumstances where lying is necessary and does not make truth the enemy, when telling the truth causes immediate bad action.

When people in Germany were sheltering people during the holocaust, and a Nazi official asked if they were hiding anyone, the correct response was "no" even though it was a lie. When someone doesn't believe in a religion or is gay or something, but they would be cast out of the home or "honor-killed" if parents found out, they should lie until they have a way to escape. 

6Yoav Ravid
Yes, Eliezer agrees with that and wrote about it in Meta-Honesty: Firming Up Honesty Around Its Edge-Cases (also using the hiding someone from a Nazi example)

This post isn't wrong, but I doubt anyone today (except a few crazy people) disagree with it. Do you think there is a significant risk of a large-scale human eugenics program happening before direct genetic modification becomes cheap enough to make this irrelevent?

5GeneSmith
No. I wrote this as a reference post for another larger post I'm writing on the topic of human genetic engineering. I will link to this as a brief summary of why I think other approaches to genetic engineering are better.

The problem is that crushing poverty is one source of misery, but not the only source of misery. This implies that very poor countries would have clear benefits from industrializing, but things like cultural pressures and instability also have an effect, so when resources are common other factors dominate and so additional industry doesn't affect things much.

Thanks for your well explained response! I'll keep your reasons in mind for future posts.

Rudi C190

I suggest you don’t include such unrelated politics in your posts at all. They actively detract from the main issues under discussion, and prime people for tribalist attitudes. Make a separate post about racism if you want, but don’t use it as an offhand example for a post on education.

Load More