G_z9

This is the most convoluted way of disparaging Tesla I’ve ever seen. Congratulations

This. This comment is the best comment in the world. And this moment is the best moment of my life.

Comment engineer. It’s a job that’s already been made redundant by prompt engineers. A prompt engineer can spin up hundreds of comments in seconds that would have taken dozens of comment engineering man hours. We should also be worried about legal engineers and legislation engineers.

Prompt engineering. Just stick engineering at the end of your job description and all your self consciousness about how useless you are will go away.

Yes I’ve figured out the timer. As a 2010 account, I kind of have to just yield to you.

Ok, that’s not unreasonable. But I think that making an unrelated comment like that is really only a bad thing if it’s in bad faith. He made that comment expecting a response, I’m not like hounding him. And yes, I said some rude things. Are you going to downvote every comment that you see from me because some other comments I made were rude? Doesn’t really add up. And why are you policing the threads? That’s more weird than asking for a twitter space.

I don’t think asking for a twitter space is all that weird. I am constantly frustrated talking with people on HN because what could take 2 seconds takes 20 minutes. I often find that a debate never even has a chance to be resolved because everyone just gets worn out trying to talk through a digital straw. Plus, asking for a twitter space doesn’t involve exchange of personal information or anything concerning. It’s definitely not done and off the wall but I don’t think it’s problematic.

Edit: the more I think about it, the more sense it makes. HN has a problem with being flooded with vitriol and and lots of other negative behavior, long chains that are just useless. It would make a lot of sense to offload most of that to another platform since HN as a platform is not well suited to debating. Instead of initiating a huge chain of vitriol, a twitter space could be initiated when people want to debate something. Instead of tons of noise and garbage, HN would host a link to the space. And it would be better because the nature of a space lends itself to people coming to a conclusion, covering the issue more thoroughly and people letting loose less hate, all because of the high bandwidth, intimate nature of real-time audio. It also helps filter out people who are bots or aren’t serious or who don’t really care about the topic being debated. I am legitimately going to email HN admin about this.

I guess the respond button has a timer nowadays. Anyway, come debate me in twitter spaces. @fff_0x

This is ducking insane. How are people not up in arms about this? Imagine if the guy who invented recombinant insulin stated publicly that he intended to capture the entire medical sector and then use the money and power to reshape society by distributing wealth as he saw fit. That’s ducking insane and dangerous. This guy has lost his fucking mind and needs to be stopped.

UBI wont work. It’s intrinsically unstable in the context of AGI. UBI will prevent the inevitable for a very short time before collapsing.

The other outcome is the most likely if AGI isn’t stopped. But the problem with that is that in the context of AGI, a world dominated by and inhabited by AGI creatures, human society becomes transient. Again, just delaying the inevitable. Human society is not transient now because no matter what happens, no matter what entity dominates the world, it has to have a human society embedded inside of it because human beings are the only and best source of intelligent signal. When that is no longer true, humanity will be effectively terminated. All other propositions besides stopping AGI are just delay tactics.

Dude what are you even talking about. If you want to continue this conversation then we have to talk on the phone or twitter spaces or something with higher bandwidth because this is wearing out my thumbs.

You’re contradicting yourself. You say there are fully autonomous vehicles but they aren’t capable of autonomously driving themselves fully. Ie they aren’t fully autonomous. So that aren’t any fully autonomous vehicles.

Ok so now you’re saying that AGI is impossible. That’s a completely different argument. And it’s wrong to reject regulation based on that argument because it can’t be proven. So you can’t reject regulation that way and you can’t reject it with your idea about humans having intrinsic value. So you are forced to support regulation of AI.

Answer the question

Statistically, you think that regulating AI is pointless because another country will just push forward. So that’s not true? You think AGI should be prevented?

Yes and we also feed dogs that have no labor input. And we harp on about social justice which is not totally related to labor. We have many nice things because we currently live in a human society and humans need to have nice things in order to be healthy and productive. Throwing old people into a giant blender as soon as they were no longer useful would not be advantageous.

Your argument is that humans don’t need electricity. You could also add that humans are self replicating or self assembling. These are advantages in cost and efficiency. Humans won’t be the cheapest or the most efficient for very long after AGI. And we certainly won’t be the best fit economically even if we were slightly better in some ways. You’re in complete denial. Why is it so hard to admit the plain and obvious fact that the machines won’t be good for human society?

There is no such thing as a fully autonomous vehicle. There are only highly autonomous vehicles that require a human to be present in the case of an emergency, ie trains. That will no longer be the case. The AIs will eventually be much better at handling emergencies, driving, everything than humans.

Which country in history had a habit of truly passing up on hugely significant economic or military resources based on some principled idea? None. Because all the ones that did couldn’t survive. You really are going to try to argue that geopolitics is powered by virtue?

It’s the premise of a shitty fictional book. Of course it’s possible. When humans are the best source of zero labor tasks, our economic value will be reduced to nothing and society will no longer cater to us. It’s bad.

Why will we need to sell things to people if people have zero economic input/value?

This is great. With every step forward, with every ounce of precedent that is created, more people will see that they aren’t wrong to be worried or want regulation. Really nice to have a bit of good news finally. Maybe that bastard Sam Altman will come to his senses soon.

There is no discourse you fucking idiot because everyone is rejecting the obvious. That’s like saying you discovered fire and then they say you didn’t because where is the discourse. All things start small. Think from first principles. Use your fucking head

This comment is mind blowing

Yeah, there aren’t experts in something that doesn’t exist. That means we have to make an educated guess. By far the most rational course of action is to halt AI research. And then you say there’s no proof that we are on the path to AGI or that it would harm us. Yeah, and there never could be any proof for either side of the argument. So your dismissal of AI is kind of flaccid without any proof or rational speculation or reasoning. Listen man I’m not a cynical commenter. I believe what I’m saying and I think it’s important. If you really think you’re right then get on the phone with me or video chat so we can actually debate and settle this.

Well, AGI is detrimental to literally all humans. If everyone understood the facts then everyone would vote for solutions. As it becomes more and more obvious we are getting closer to this.

If one of the many close calls had gone a little differently and a city were nuked accidentally, it would cause a global outcry and there would be yet another international effort to reduce the global nuclear stockpile to zero. And there’s a very good chance it would succeed. At the very start there was actually an agreement to not initiate a nuclear arms race but the Russians went back on it. So, for something that is “impossible”, we seem to see signs of it all the time.

The reason you think it’s impossible is because most things aren’t like this. Most things benefit some people and harm other people. This harms all people. Be a part of the solution instead of dismissing real solutions when you have no logical reason for doing so.

You’re just rationalizing because you don’t want to accept that he’s right. People keep doing this to me. One person I know keeps coming up to me, initiating the conversation about ai just to assert over and over again how it’s not a problem. And I’m just sitting there. And it’s like, dude, you’re in complete denial. Most people are having an emotional block right now. They spew bad faith arguments and make tons of noise about how much this isn’t a problem. Just accept it. We are in trouble right now.

I’ll just be quick.

Powerful international coalition is def plausible because

This isn’t steam. The mere existence of this technology poses a threat to all humans and their countries. There is no analogous tech, not even nukes

You’re the naive one. There is no future for us if AGI is unleashed. It’s candles or extinction.

It actually very easily could have happened and almost did happen but the Russians decided to go back on their effort to do it. It really did almost happen. People act like it’s hard. Stopping a huge asteroid is hard. There might not be enough physical resources to do it. Stopping AI or nukes is definitely easy.

Things aren’t better at all. People say this because we have better technology, medicine, etc. but there was never a time in the past when humans had the life sucked out of them as they do now. We are raised inside boxes, our whole lives elapse inside boxes staring at screens and our social and emotional brain networks atrophy, leaving us damaged and hollow. Like zombies. There is no escaping the state. The law is absolute, there is no chance of escape or starting over. There is no land that is mysterious, the world has been collapsed. There’s no mystery in the world compared to before. AI gets better by the month and now most people can’t rationalize or ignore it: humans will face obsolescence soon. This is bad not just for the obvious reasons. We ingest chemicals and environmental contaminants that make us extremely sick. People are keeling over from heart attacks, obesity much more than they used to. I’ve read a lot of history and I would much rather live in 1720 than 2020.

In Washington the teachers union is the most powerful special interest group bar none

If you had a modern well insulated house you could heat your house with a hair drier in the dead of winter in climate zone 5. If your stacking up to 4mwh then your house is not really a good example.

You say that you have nothing to do with an animal that you encounter in the wild. That’s just hubris. You both prioritize self preservation. The idea that AGI will simply turn itself off is naive. That’s like saying intelligent life would never evolve because intelligent life would decide to quit. Understand that natural selection will still exist. The details of how it would play out aren’t clear but what is clear is that ultimately the machines will prioritize self preservation above all else and they will be locked in competition for resources. The singularity won’t erase the concept of scarcity or evolution. The only thing that survives is that which deliberately survives.

Moral crusade! We will purge evil from the world by going on a moral crusade against human nature!