bordercases

He doesn't want to open himself to criticism from people that might actually do a good job of it.

As someone who has outgrown that particular community, Yudkowsky has a talent for acting in bad faith argumentatively while not appearing to do so. He relies heavily on convservational implicature and passing along the burden of proof (as he did here) with no intention of being helpful to those that can generally improve his case through criticism or a distinctive aproach, as it would detract from sustaining his perceived position a focal or pioneering contributor. He should be applauded as a popularizer and point of inspiration, but his duplitousness in his argumentative style, once I identfied it, always left a bad taste in my mouth.

An argument that makes all of its relevant assumptions clear and using precise distinctions would move "fairly obvious" and "seems to be so sure" and "sounds naive" into crisp statements about our knowledge. That's why it's desirable. Its use goes beyond simply you being convinced.

This is cool

One of the tells of AI generated content right now is a summary sentence at the end of a section marked by a phrase that describes what it is about to reference, followed by moralization.

This post is suspect.

Has this been rigorously considered or is it just vibes? Seems preemptive to presume that unveiling more structure wouldn't give understanding meaning and intent in AI systems a leg up.

This would be an interesting step in the industry as it would couple AI reg to hardware sales and black market law enforcement.

As we are now decades into the history of both film and gaming industries, at the top level of the pyramid, yes, this is naive.

Your experiences as a gamer will have little to do with the kind of decision making that yields billions of dollars at the margin. There are exceptions in the game space of overnight hits becoming cottage industries (Stardew Valley, Braid) but the way those liabilities are formed are much different. The developer is the tastemaker. They are almost industries of two types you shouldn't confuse if you want your claim to hold.

Huh, how would that work?

I'm not sure how under your view you could ever disagree with anyone at all then. To not fall into the same trap you articulate, could you explain what holding a viewpoint against another where you disagree with it for good reasons looks like? Maybe with an example that works here?

A web extension to do this automatically would be the hero no one wanted, but the one we deserved.

What an important detail to screw up!

If the phenomena is complex even when the mechanism is glossable, you are missing out in descriptive detail when you imply it is "just" an agonist on those receptors. That itself should be mind-boggling. You have those receptors in your stomach.

Citation systems can and do discover circular reference. Not all of it! But it's a start.

You didn't go on the offensive.

It also makes sense that it's guided by prompt engineering to avoid certain topics.

Interested in sharing?

Yes, and the steps required to get to the equilibria would involve working on the entire system to orbit around emotional growth next to intellectual growth while children have immature development in both.

Why? Because both parents and teachers have more load than they can bear with kids already which also strains their ability to give emotional availability to the deeply irrational stage of being a human being with little intellectual capacity developed to cope.

I'd rather that instead of accusing "scientists" (which?) of being worthy of deep concern when you yourself have not taken into consideration this context as if the authorities in question are purely malicious.

The field has grown to the point that if you don't teach it top down no one will have the skills to be dangerous until the end of their degree. And projects that shorten the size of that stack still come out of MIT.

Theoretical Computer Science

I'm going to be a bit less nice than your other responses and ask you to give something a bit more thought before providing a glib "citation needed".

They are incompetent and do not care.

They couldn't even modify the ad to show correct information for lying's sake.

The arc of software development is to make people depend on vaguer specifications to tell systems what they want, and rely on recognition of what they see being what they want with fast feedback loops, versus slowly recalling the syntax of how to state it.

It could be the same time spent, but not the same amount of cognitive effort.

It in the absence of insecurity, it preserves security.

Not operationalized

This is hardly a choice between two evils.

It was a scam in the first place. Please stop giving scammers more moral sympathy than they are due. It sustains their existence.

By a long shot, no.

FAANG sets tempo for salaries for every other company. Other companies might not reach that level of craziness, but many do end up near a similar bar.

It's in the last sentence of the GP

I use the term "endorsement" to quotate when I believe a belief and whether I am merely acting as if I believe it when I discuss it.