kmijyiyxfbklao

What if they find it special because they build memories with the AI games they play? Is that something you hope doesn't happen?

Now you are just trolling

This is completely crazy. How could someone point out that assuming evil intentions is not a good way to interact with people without being accused of doing the same thing as the FBI telling MLK to kill himself?

He doesn't need to have it, because his comment is carefully crafted to not say anything other than signaling anti-AI sentiment.

Of course AI "almost certainly" solves fewer problems than the people that think AI can solve all the problems think. That doesn't mean anything. Also notice how he puts together "AI didn't help" and "AI caused harm", and then says that's the most common experience.

If you trust the system and you think things are going to work out, then you have nothing to worry about. But people are saying this is a crisis, and to solve a crisis you have to have at least a vague plan.

What if you discover that you are exceptionally ugly?

You are supposed to fixed the same way the first world countries fixed it, by staying there are improving things with the other people that want to improve things. Oh wait they all left for other countries, oops I guess people that couldn't leave get to stay and rot in unfixable corruption.

If every human in the world offloaded life decisions to the current AI models, we would live in a better world by the commonly used metrics (less crime, better life expectancy, people doing better financially)

How was it disproven by the New World? The countries that mixed (Latin America) are weaker than the country that didn't (USA)

How is 1500 years ago a short time frame? Yeah, people moved, but how many people in what amount of time is important.

And places become more boring if the have the same migrants as every other place, not less boring.

> I've done that evaluation with LLMs and they're definitely not conscious.

This is an important point to just make it a side comment like that. Tell us how we can evaluate if something is conscious.

You can always trick investors. For example all the overpromising Musk has done over the years. Also when you are that famous you can sell lower quality goods for a higher price that people will buy because they are associated to you.

Twitter seems to be more popular in reddit too

https://old.reddit.com/domain/threads.com/top/

https://old.reddit.com/domain/x.com/top/

But there is a distinction we can make between flowers and wasps. If there is no distinction we can make between Schwartz and non-Schwartz, then we are susceptible to the sample problem with or without AI. And if there is a distinction then we can use that distinction to test Bob, and make him learn from his test failures.

That's all good if you assume people can't be tricked (tricked into paying more, tricked into buying something they don't want, tricked into working harder). The tricked person ends up with less and Elon ends up with more.

Well if that gets us LinkedIn, we should move as far away from that as possible, and not listen to the people who want real names everywhere.

No, it's important. People are allowed to discourage each other from buying a product that they consider subpar.

Not conservative (there's nothing traditional about this) or liberal, just surveillance authoritarianism.

Planning includes the prototype you build with AI.

This is as useful as doing physics with spherical cows.

The whole point is that mandating websites to require age verification is more authoritarian than people are pretending it is.

>Or if they're still a kid, they can have their privileges temporarily revoked.

Since people are already talking about using the law instead of parenting this needs clarification. Are the parents the one that would revoke their privileges or the government?

It's purposefully undefined because it's a social concept, not an engineering one. And it's also subjective. You can tell because they use OpenClaw as an example of a tasteful project. I would put OpenClaw in the same category as memecoins in terms of taste. Obviously crypto can be way more harmful, but in terms of taste both are on the "internet meme" category, as helpful as OpenClaw can be.

I don't think it counts as counter-signaling if can call him out.

> 4. Myth: Immigrants will replace the population.

> Reality: Newcomers quickly adopt the habits of their new country. Within one generation, immigrant birth rates drop to match everyone else’s.

That doesn't address the "myth". You can keep bringing more migrants and eventually replace the population.

Good. Being OK with authoritarianism because they are on your side is never good.

I'm OK with you re-editing the movie as you watch it, but you can't say you watched the same movie as other people that don't do that.

Yeah, I think that's why I don't find this superinteresting. It's more a viral social media thing, than an AI thing.

Since there are no humans involved, it's more like growing a tree. Sure it's good to know how trees grow, but not knowing about cells didn't stop thousands of years of agriculture.

If it's "Who is worse Google or LLMs?", I think I'll say Google is worse. The biggest issue I see with LLMs is needing to pay a subscription to tech companies to be able to use them.