A phrase that has been popping up lately is: "You can just do stuff" Every time I read it a part of me goes "Yeah! You can just do stuff!". And then I forget about it again. Part of this is that "doing" and "stuff" are pretty vague. So, why...
I've been lurking on LessWrong for quite a while and I've been following the high-level discussions on AI, AGI and take-off speed. I've had this simmer in the back of my mind and I have some ideas on this that I haven't seen expressed elsewhere. That can be because I...
Doing stuff has consequences. But that doesn't make it impossible to do the stuff, though it might make it very inconvenient?
A phrase that has been popping up lately is: "You can just do stuff" Every time I read it a part of me goes "Yeah! You can just do stuff!". And then I forget about it again.
Part of this is that "doing" and "stuff" are pretty vague. So, why not just do stuff, like make a list of stuff that you can just do?
This is for own inspiration as much as for the people reading it. And I'm very happy to hear further suggestions!
You can just:
I've been lurking on LessWrong for quite a while and I've been following the high-level discussions on AI, AGI and take-off speed. I've had this simmer in the back of my mind and I have some ideas on this that I haven't seen expressed elsewhere. That can be because I haven't read thoroughly enough, but maybe they can add something new to the discussion as well? So here goes:
1. Bandwidth
The current big thing is Large Language Models (LLM). ChatGPT and Bing write well enough that they can be confused with being (weird) humans. This certainly is impressive and it is obviously a step towards further capabilities. However, what I haven't seen discussed... (read 971 more words →)
I believe that spaceships use cooling fans to radiate off excess heat. Earth is nothing but a spaceship so I don't see why we couldn't shed heat this way if it were to become necessary.
Humans (v1.0, us) have a limited bandwidth for information intake and processing; what is left to "want" once you saturate that? This to me implies that there is also a limit to desires.
One of the things that I find helpful is to see how similar people who like X are to myself. I'm currently considering a career change and I can identify three important parts of this career. In one I'm very similar to people I know in this career, in another I find it hard to say how similar I am and in a third I'm quite dissimilar. And because of this I see a fairly big risk (I have high uncertainty about) me enjoying this career.
It has been my experience that it's impossible to convince someone of something. However, it is sometimes possible to help them convince themselves. What is needed for that is a genuine interest in their position. Why do they believe what they believe? And through asking questions (not by giving arguments!) It sometimes happens that they think about something that they never considered before, which loosens their firmly held belief by a bit.
The "risk" of this is that you might get answers that you weren't expecting, ones that actually make sense and you'll find yourself taking a step in their direction.
When that happens however the conversation tends to open up even more, the other person will feel that you really are interested in learning and not convincing. When you try to convince people become defensive. When you try to learn they own up.
Interesting idea, but sparse on how you'd actually achieve this. What is your vision for what an MVP would actually do?
And, If you succeed, what stops this from becoming evil after all? Writing "Don't be evil" helps, but it's not enough.
How are you going to make money off of this? Without money there is a real risk of something slowly dying out.
Good luck!
I don't think currency is a -unit- of value, in fact I don't think such a thing can exist. Value for me means, "what would you be willing to give up to obtain something?" Value is subjective; a glass of water generally has close to zero value but if you're stranded in the desert it will have an extremely high value.
And this way value can be created: I have lots of glasses of water in this desert, you have none. You give me your kingdom and I give you a glass and we both give up less value than we get.
I agree that it's good to get rejected often. But if you're trying to get rejected often you might fail and not get rejected. And end up with 5 new friends, 3 internships, a new job, 4 dates and a dog. All of which take up time, next to the things you're already occupied with. So it's good to apply for things, but only if you have the capacity to actually follow up on them.
There doesn't seem to be any technical issue with making this both democratic and independent: have a direct election for central bank boards? This creates a divide with "normal" politics and creates more democracy.
How do you see this resulting in markets going up?
Two things: