All of Dr_Manhattan's Comments + Replies

Any updates on the API? (thinking of) Playing around with interesting ways to index LW, figure there should be something better than scraping

4habryka
Not sure what you mean. The API continues to exist (and has existed since the beginning of LW 2.0).

So how does one invest in China, as a country?

He was only a de facto mysterian: thought mind is so complicated that it may as well be mysterious (but ofc he believed it's ultimately just physics). This position is updateable, and he clearly updated.

A net saying "I'm thinking about ways to kill you" does not necessarily imply anything whatsoever about the net actually planning to kill you

 

Since these nets are optimized for consistency (as it makes textual output more likely), wouldn't outputting text that is consistent with this "thought" be likely? E.g. convincing the user to kill themselves, maybe giving them a reason (by searching the web)? 

I've been wishing for someone to write AI-singularity parallel of Bardbury's Martian Chronicles (which are pretty much independent sample/ simulations of how living on Mars could go)

Sharing a personal weird trick why not. I like falling asleep to light TV (via iPad). I watch short shows that a) I like and don't think are boring b) I have seen before. Usually 10 minutes into a 20 min show I'm ready (Futurama is my favorite for this + my meme game is much improved by this)

1Alex Vermillion
In case you don't know, your specific show pick has been noted as a favorite for this: https://www.reddit.com/r/Futurama_Sleepers/

Was thinking about you! Glad you made it out. Feel free to DM if I can be of assistance

2avturchin
Thanks!

MIRI is bottlenecked more on ideas worth pursuing and people who can pursue them, than on funding

Ideas come from (new) people, and you mentioned seed planting which should contribute to having such people in 4-6 years, seems like still a worthy thing to do for AGI if anything is worth doing for any cause at all (given your short timelines). If you agree what's the bottleneck for that effort?

Related work: 
Show Your Work: Scratchpads for Intermediate Computation with Language Models
https://arxiv.org/abs/2112.00114

(from very surface-level perusal) Prompting the model resulted in 
1) Model outputting intermediate thinking "steps"

2) Capability gain

Koller & Friedman

 

They primarily & extensively statistical graphical models, not causality (but have a chapter on it)

Since comments get occluded you should refer to an edit/update somewhere at the top if you want it to be seen by those who already read your original comment.

Yes, I would! Any pointers? 
(to avoid miscommunication I'm reading this to say that people are more likely to build UFAI because of traumatizing environment vs. normal reasons Eli mentioned)

Double-masking

 

Wait, you can't get N95 or KN95 there? 

1masasin
I'm wearing a KN95 with a cloth mask on top.
2ChristianKl
Belgium is in Europe, so there won't be N95 masks but FFP-2 or KN95 and you can order those on Amazon. 

Sounds like vaguely-good conclusions from my pattern-matching experience but very poorly argued, with much overloading of "impatience" and many cherry picked examples. Surprisingly bad quality from you. Also, "patience" is a great virtue, context matters a lot.

Ok. To clarify, one of them is to blame. Maybe it's not the CDC. History will tell.

4Elizabeth
All data I've seen indicates it was a poorly interplay between the FDA/HHS that caused the CDC to be the only source of tests (because FDA/HHS were the ones with the legal power to do so, and it's recorded that they used it). It's included on this list because interacted with decisions the CDC *did* make. I don't think it's misleading because we noted which agency did what, and have since edited the section header to make it clear even to skimmers.
Most obviously, blaming the CDC for the FDA and HHS not allowing 3rd party detection kits is somewhere between false and misleading.

Please support this claim. It seems obvious that they shat the bed (don't know which agency, let god sort them out for now, history and FOIA requests will sort them out in the future). It seems obvious from reading the news that many many local and commercial labs would have been ready with capacity a lot sooner than they are if FDA/CDC/HHS conglomerate got out of the way sooner.

It's quite plausible that this is due... (read more)

6Davidmanheim
The CDC is not the same as HHS or the FDA, since they have different staff, are in different locations, and they have different goals (42 USC 6a versus 42 USC 43 and 21 USC). Given that, I'm not sure why we should trust the CDC more or less because of the actions of the FDA. I'm not sure why this claim needs further support. Note that the CDC has no legal or other authority over what tests non-federal government laboratories can perform. They do have oversight over both certain types of labs from a biosafety standpoint, but that's mostly irrelevant to allowing them to do tests, and there is no claim that the CDC banned research. And if we are asking the question that this post purports to answer - should we trust the CDC - it makes quite a difference whether the decision being discussed was something they had control over. If you want to know whether the "FDA/CDC/HHS conglomerate," should be blamed, I'd ask whether you think they are all the same thing, or whether this question in incoherent. As noted above, they aren't the same, so I claim the question is mostly incoherent. You might suggest that they are all a part of the same government, so they should be lumped together. I'd suggest that you could ask whether you should trust the "DR_Manhattan/Davidmanheim/Elizabeth, jimrandomh conglomerate" in our judgement about whether to differentiate between these agencies. Clearly, of course, our judgement differs, but we're all a part of the same web site, so maybe we can all be lumped together. If that doesn't make sense, good.
Answer by Dr_Manhattan20
  • Significant political regime disruption in some places, Iran specifically (probably for the better there)
  • Depending on how much Chinese government fudges with the current numbers they will appear to a) have bungled at first b) actually efficiently handled the problem at an enormous scale and US will appear to do things in the opposite order. Which leads me to...
  • Trump is weakened and Bloomberg's position is going to look very strong: some actual history of crisis management, strong-man people feel comfortable with in times of uncertainty, plus he "owns" one of coutry's top med schools
  • Massive disruption in service sector as people cut down on non-necessities...

This is useful in case you have facing a choice of riding it out at home and going to a hospital with high probability of getting infected if you're not already. E.g. if you have fever chances are still high you're just experiencing regular flu, and should not go to the hospital, but if your oxigen starts dropping into the danger zone you need to go.

Potential method of coping: disinfecting room. Unpack the stuff in protective gear, then after unpacked blast it with UV light?

But it's possible we could even isolate there in the in-law unit.

I thought this was the pretty clear cut answer before you wrote it. Totally endorse. Wear masks on the flight if possible. Ask your parents to stock up or start sending prep packages there (Amazon, Costco delivers)

2Chris Hibbert
This doesn't seem to be advised unless you have professionally fitted N95 masks. Surgical masks and nominally fitted serious masks do a decent job of preventing you from transmitting the virus, but little to protect you. And anecdotally, wearing a mask may cause you to touch your face and mask a lot more, which is on the wrong side of the trade-off.
2Adam Zerner
Agreed.
The first question for me is are people starving in Wuhan due to the outbreak?

Answer is no, as of now, though food situation is uncomfortable. (my wife has relatives there she's in contact with). Trucks come to apartment complexes and people pick up.

I'm not sure the analogy translates well to US though. For better or worse us people are less organized. Also large % population live in suburbs where such deliveries are not feasible.

OTOH we have an excellent general delivery system in Amazon, UPS etc.

I'm slightly worried.

1jmh
I'm suburban and at least one of the local grocers has a delivery -- some of the others offer online order and then pickup from a locker or they will bring to the car. I think the other thing is that in the suburban setting you already mitigate some of the risk because you simply don't get as close to each other as is the case with urban living -- I don't get on the same elevator as everyone else on the floor or in the building generally. (Though the condo residential-retail-commercial model is starting to appear.) I think if you live in any of the big US cities and this starts spreading you need to think a bit more about preparing for quarantine and general dealing with things. Standard, single family home suburban USA and rural USA is going to see much less impact.

There's some but not a lot of interest in this topic on LW; I have a mailing list with primarily rationalist types on the topic; PM me email address to be added

Data always says something unless it's randomly generated. At the very least Chinese data provides lower bounds on some things. You can get somewhat better estimates if you model their incentives (though the lying will greatly increase the uncertainty and complexity of any model)

1Stuart Anderson
-

There's the opposite effect: the early diagnosed cases tend to concentrate on the more obviously serious ones (more likely to die).

https://twitter.com/robertwiblin/status/1222577306515976192

It is also good to invest in improving ones’ immune system by health food, vitamins, light therapy, as it is our best protection of the virus. Evacuation into a cold county house would weaken the immune system.

How much can one "improve" one's immune system by these methods in a short time? Is there any data to back this up?

In general agree with the rest. In worst-case scenario ability to self-isolate for a while ("bug in" in prepper lingo) seems worthwhile.

8ozziegooen
I've tried Pocket, Speechify, and Voice Dream. Of these, Voice Dream seems to do the best at viewing the PDF while listening to it.

On the one hand this post does a great job of connecting to previous work, leaving breadcrumbs and shortening the inferential distance. On the other hand what is this at the end?

But one thing I'm pretty sure won't help much is clever logic puzzles about implausibly sophisticated Nazis.

I have no idea what this is talking about.

7Benquo
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/xdwbX9pFEr7Pomaxv/meta-honesty-firming-up-honesty-around-its-edge-cases
[edit] It also seems like this is the sort of thing that marketing pretty strongly encourages misrepresentation of. "All children are above-average," in that the restaurant wants to present itself as serving healthy, cheap, tasty food, while also paying its employees well and having good returns for its investors. But several of those variables are in direct tension with each other, and there's not great language for speaking publicly about the tradeoffs you're making. 

Couple of reasons spring to mind:

  • Marketing leverages the Hal
... (read more)

The way I understand the objection it that YC promotes "building great products", which attracts (a lot of) certain kinds of founders, but in fact YC is optimizing for something else (primarily described in Black Swan Farming, confirmed by other sources). I believe they are quite value-additive to the companies they accept, but attract more founders than if they were "honest about their optimization function", where some founders could have been better off engaging with other VCs on possibly better terms.

6Matt Goldenberg
All VCs are black swan farming. It is the only model that makes sense as a VC firm.

>> Fiddly puttering with something that fascinates you is the source of most genuine productivity. (Anything from hardware tinkering, to messing about with cost spreadsheets until you find an efficiency, to writing poetry until it “comes out right”.) Sometimes the best work of this kind doesn’t look grandiose or prestigious at the time you’re doing it.
Hmm, I use to spend quite a bit of time fiddling with assembly language implementations of encryption code to try to squeeze out a few more percent of speed. Pretty sure that
... (read more)

I think in part these could be "lessons relevant to Sarah", a sort of a philosophical therapy that can't be completely taken out of context. Which is why some of these might seem of low relevance or obvious.

Fiddly puttering with something that fascinates you is the source of most genuine productivity. (Anything from hardware tinkering, to messing about with cost spreadsheets until you find an efficiency, to writing poetry until it "comes out right".) Sometimes the best work of this kind doesn't look grandiose or prestigious at the time you're doing it.

http://paulgraham.com/genius.html seems to be promoting a similar idea

Ross https://web.stanford.edu/~shachter/ uses something like this to score answers to (appropriately) Decision Analysis homework questions. (Don't remember the exact rule, but the intent was the same)

2Dr_Manhattan
I'll claim LW priority for pointing to the idea (but not to elaborating it in a post) https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/isSMDR8rMr5pTzJK5/example-of-poor-decision-making-under-pressure-from-game?commentId=YzvDcA357NboxD2fE :)
2Unnamed
I recall hearing about classes at Carnegie Mellon (in the Social and Decision Sciences department) which gave exams in this sort of format.
What does it imply for things like AI governance and global coordination on x-risks?

I've read the article a while ago, and vaguely concluded there should be some implications here (but largely uncertain about the direction or magnitude, being a non-expert). Interested to hear what people think (esp. people who concentrate on policy)

How about we let go of success, but keep doing challenging stuff anyway, just for the fun of it?

This sort of feels like Feynman's attitude, despite him being extremely successful.

Seems way off from the actual release; any post-mortem?

4James_Miller
I had falsely assumed that they would be releasing a product to the general public relatively soon.

A decent solution to the "who should you be accountable to", from the wisdom of the ancients (shows thought on many of the considerations mentioned)

When in doubt, remember Warren Buffett’s rule of thumb: “… I want employees to ask themselves whether they are willing to have any contemplated act appear the next day on the front page of their local paper—to be read by their spouses, children and friends—with the reporting done by an informed and critical reporter.”
4Jiro
Leaving out "parents" gets rid of some of the obvious objections, but even then, I don't want my children to know about my sexual fetishes. Other objections may include, for instance, letting your friends know that you voted for someone who they think will ruin the country. And I certainly wouldn't want rationalist-but-unpopular opinions I hold to be on the front page of the local paper to be seen by everyone (Go ahead, see what happens when the front page of the newspaper announces that you think that you should kill a fat man to stop a trolley.) This aphorism amounts to "never compartmentalize your life" which doesn't seem very justifiable.

I think the Hypothesis is not about Open Threads specifically

Tracking employment/location and publishing/conference attendance records of researchers will probably be good source data for this.

Answer by Dr_Manhattan100

I think it was easier in that era; AFAIK they used conventional secrecy methods (project names, locations, misdirection, need to know, obfuscation) to pull it off. Feynman's "Surely you're joking" and Rhodes "making the atomic bomb" are good sources for some examples (and otherwise recommended)

3moses
I read Feynman, but I don't think he said anything about how the US government explained the withdrawal of top physicists from public space. Maybe it was the case that "the US military is using top physicists to do something" was not a secret; it only was a secret what exactly they're working on. In that case this would not be repeatable either, because "the US military is using top AI researchers to do something" is not quite the same level of vague :)
ESRogs260

If ever there was a question with your name on it... ;-)

5Raemon
Hmm. Perhaps a related question is "prior to the Manhattan Project, had there ever been anything like a Manhattan project before?". It seems like quite plausibly the answer was "no, not really", which makes security through obscurity much easier.

Small typo:

Hence it has no motivation to manipulate[d] humans through its answer.
2Stuart_Armstrong
Corrected, thanks!

I somewhat overlooked this line and yes, it's a nod in the right direction

Based on the transcript this does not sound like a FOOM discussion (as in rapid self-improvement) other than mentioning "group learning" by autonomous cars, which is maybe somewhat related. Also the pregnancy ad story is much more about pattern recognition with lots of data than any serious AI.

Basically JP is, in this area, a complete layman (unlike Gates, Musk, or, from the other side, Pinker) whose opinion counts for little and not talking about FOOM anyway.

Vaniver320

Yeah, it's sort of awkward that there are two different things one might want to talk about with FOOM: the idea of recursive self improvement in the typical I.J. Good sense, and the "human threshold isn't special and can be blown past quickly" idea. AlphaZero being able to hit the superhuman level at Go after 3 days of training, and doing so only a year or two after any professional Go player was defeated by a computer, feels relevant to the second thing but not the first (and is connected to the 'fleets of cars will learn very dif... (read more)

"once those things get a little bit smart they're not going to stop at a little bit smart for very long they're gonna be unbelievably smart like overnight. "

Celebrity opinions count for something in ways that expert opinions do not. They seem to reach more people, for one thing. That's partially because people just accept what celebrities say because they admire them, but it seems to me that it's also because celebrities tend to find ways of expressing the essence of ideas that are more accessible to laypeople.

Anyway, for what... (read more)

dxu150

I don't think Gates, Musk, or Pinker should count as much more than laymen when it comes to AI risk, either.

Is this much different from Scott Adams' advice https://dilbertblog.typepad.com/the_dilbert_blog/2007/07/career-advice.html

of


if you want something extraordinary, you have two paths:
1. Become the best at one specific thing.
2. Become very good (top 25%) at two or more things.

?


0Akshay Gulabrao
More like 1%. People forget how large the gap between 1% and best in the world is.
7johnswentworth
I doubt that top 25% is usually sufficient to be best-in-the-world, which is what you need to circumvent GEM.
Load More