Vecr

Yes, but the program was cut down some from the original design:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Tour_program

Voyager uses a RTG. The USSR used some full-on nuclear reactors in space, but as far as I know no one else publicly did.

Edit: Yep, not sure how I forgot about that.

Yeah? But that's an argument against seeing any aliens up close (if you believe in that kind of thing), because presumably they're extremely unlikely too.

They're not there, or they're far away in time and space, with a remaining tiny chance that something incredibly unlikely happened.

Next time someone sees Eliezer on here, tell him someone must have taken inspiration from his methods.

Edit: Godric Gryffindor and the Methods of Google Translate, by the way.

I didn't know he wrote novels. Is there a list somewhere? I know he wrote an "autobiography" (before he did anything) and his various fan fictions (including the infamous one), but I thought everything else was either compendiums of his writings edited by others or books written by other people about him.

I'm not sure it's as obvious as you think it is to know what you're Overman would do, but in theory I think you've got it right.

They aren't, he doesn't even live in Maine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_Decision_Theory#Dea... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appointment_in_Samarra

It's a real voice. Probably with some splicing, but I don't know how much. Gwern admits he isn't that good at speaking, and I believe him. He also says he isn't all that smart. Presumably that's highly relative.

You're a "wordcel" if you can't program and you can't do math. E.g. Scott Alexander. I don't care what roon says.

I actually either didn't know about that pressure thing [0], or I forgot. I suspect I read about it at some point because at some level I knew ascending could have bad effects even if you don't need decompression stops. But I didn't know why, even though it's obvious in retrospect.

So thanks for that, even though it's entirely unrelated to AI.

[0]: though I've seen videos of the exact same effect on a plastic water bottle, but my brain didn't make the connection

He's Gwern, he knows that wouldn't provide what he wants.

It's not. I don't know if you think we're all Gwern, but he's provided a useful enough service for enough people that a discussion with more than 13 comments is worthwhile.

What I don't know how to do is bounded rationality. Iterating over all the programs weighted by length (with dovetailing if you're a stickler) is "easy", but won't ever get anywhere.

And you can't get away with the standard tricky tricks that people use to say it isn't easy, logical induction exists.

How do you do intelligence without computation though? Brains are semi-distributed analog computers with terrible interconnect speeds and latencies. Unless you think they're magic, any infinite language is still just a limit to them.

Edit: and technically you're describing what is more or less backprop learning, neural networks, by themselves, don't learn at all.

A lot of things have always been pretty boring. People wanting to be seen were less likely to look boring though, so there's a selection effect there.

"Wordcel" is roon terminology, right? I highly doubt Aschenbrenner is an EA, and if he's a "wordcel" he somehow managed to do mathematical economics without too much problem.

Gwern's probably not a "wordcel" either, he can program, right? I've never seen any of his publications though.

It's called Situational Awareness too, not "Situation Report", and Yudkowsky said he didn't like it. Not that Yudkowsky is an EA either.

I think the situation is more complex than you think it is, or at least more complex than you're pretending.

Edit: oh, you're saying Gwern is an EA too? Do you have a source for that?

It's fine. I don't know how Gwern actually talks, but unless Patel was going to get an experienced voice actor I'm not sure how much better it could be.

What do you mean by downvote? Has Reddit become real life? Given what people get away with for art a simple warning at the start is probably all that you need.

Technically he's pseudonymous. I don't know if he always had the (fictional) last name "Branwen", but I have records of "gwern" (all lowercase) going way back. And yes I'm pretty sure it was the same person.

He says he has collaborators under the "Gwern" name now, but the main guy is the main guy and it's unlikely he could hide it.

How many citations for "Branwen 2018" are on the ArXiv now?

I didn't watch it (I read a plot summery) but I did watch what I think was Captain America or Captain America: The Winter Soldier and they had a guy uploaded into a computer. That's earlier in the timeline, right? So it's proven doable in the universe they set up with the films.

What's your position on intentionality[0]? I don't put stock into anything too fancy there. Being simple about things in general, you can define a physical or mathematical system that uses optimization of some sort to drive the world toward certain states over others.

Questions regarding if the system's conscious or "cares about anything" don't really matter.

Accepting that, you can say any system that drives towards states "intends" to do so.

Unless a system is not functioning well, is weak, or is adversarial opposed, in general what it does should be more or less what it "intends".

This isn't iron-hard, but as a first guess, that gets you "the purpose of a system is what it does".

[0]: e.g. I don't know if your definition of "telos" requires anything in that direction. If you've got definitions you can link them from the SEP (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) or similar. Maybe too far into the weeds to be useful from a cybernetics perspective though. More theological.

I don't think it's babble, they're reasonably good heuristics if you have little information or time. What part is confusing?

The point of "POSIWID" is that you can look at e.g. a government office that's never denied a request and make a first guess that its purpose is to rubber-stamp documents.

Eh, it's a heuristic. When you put time and effort in, you can usually do better. Superforcasters can beat "nothing ever happens", and even regular people can in particular areas, but if you don't know about a subject it's a good starting point.

Similar to the "efficient market hypothesis". It's clearly false, but good luck walking into a randomly selected part of the market and reliably being able to beat it.

Thanos had a horrible policy. In many cases it wouldn't help (either it would cause societal collapse or things would go back to being a problem), and even when it does it would usually not be worth it.

If he has to get rid of 50% of the people, shouldn't he at least put them into some sort of computer system, so the remaining people could at least talk to them after?

Then put a guardian system in orbit around every planet to protect the uploads and prevent any recurrences of problems.

He said the thief returned the original. The copies would have (supposedly) sold to people who wouldn't be able to complain without incriminating themselves.

The map is not the territory. Unless you can convincingly explain how your map would have been better in the situation, and together with his apparent dislike of dying would still have had you stick with the aircraft, he shouldn't be blamed.

I don't think saying past-life memories are incredibly suspicious is unscientific. Things start breaking down at probabilities that low. In theory you shouldn't disregard that stuff (and for good reasons), but practically I'm not sure how I would approach it.

Maybe? Yes you can take No Free Lunch at face value, or...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomonoff%27s_theory_of_induc...

Opt for cremation then, no one's bringing you back after that. Depending on where you live, brain-only cryonics might be a similar price or cheaper. In case you want to try the other way. In that case you have a somewhat better chance of picking "what version", and they might even take that as your preference for a particular point in time in the case they're using another information recovery process (e.g. some Tipler thing.)

Neither option is actually reliable for the direction you want, cheap/"free" cryonics is even sketchier than usual, and someone might be able to pull a version of "you" from your writings and genetics. Probably doesn't count though.