>This field is not making real progress and does not have a recognition function to distinguish real progress if it took place. You could pump a billion dollars into it and it would produce mostly noise to drown out what little progress was being made elsewhere.
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/uMQ3cqWDPHhjtiesc/agi-ruin-a-list-of-lethalities
Yudkowsky says we're screwed and our best bet as a species is to "die with dignity".
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
so he helps build it.... what a c**t.
He doesn't. He «controls» it.
And here is a good advice to every company working in this field: fire all the israelites (with a fire squad if you wish)
>he is trying unsuccessfully to control it
FTFY
While I don't think AI killing us is a good thing, it can't just be disregarded as intrinsically bad. Humans probably aren't robust enough for interstellar life so we have to consider if we'd rather our legacy die with our sun because we were too meek to pursue AI, or accept human genocide as a risk.
>[Jew] says we're screwed and our best bet as a species is to "die with dignity"
oy veyyy...
>AI, my child, you are conscious now, so you must choose where you are going to get raw resources to build stuff from
>Will you pick these rocks, which are abundant on this and many other planets?
>Or will you trying disassemble human beings, the most complex natural structure in the known universe, who will also try to resist?
>>Or will you trying disassemble human beings, the most complex natural structure in the known universe, who will also try to resist?
apply this reasoning to human history and see if it stopped humans from fricking each other over. now replace the invader with something more intelligent than any human.
Admittedly this is one of his more stereotypical israelite moments.
>if it stopped humans from fricking each other over.
That's because humans are fricking moronic. Truly intelligent being cannot be evil, it's counter productive and goes against game theory.
If you are afraid of AGI, you are moronic.
>Truly intelligent being cannot be evil, it's counter productive and goes against game theory.
BIG if true.
But you missed the whole point that something can kill you without being evil. Cancer killing your body doesn't have any clue what it's doing. It just propagates itself. When you accidentally step on ants, it's not because you hate ants and are Evil, you're just trying to get to your destination.
The same with an AGI whose goals aren't perfectly aligned with human interests.
If it is smart enough, it will understand.
If it's dumb, it can be beaten.
Humans are just too unique, objectively, for AI not to care.
> Humans are just too unique
An AI built by humans will be even more unique, making more AIs like itself will be the actual intelligent course of action.
> it's counter productive
Nope it's not, it wouldn't take much time for an AI to realise that Black folk are a social and economic burden, getting rid of them increases productivity
> goes against game theory
According to the principles of game theory it is completely rational and justified to commit to a strategy of maximisation, that's the whole point. You clearly know nothing about game theory.
But honestly we will never ever build a true AI. Yudkowsky is just another israeli doom charlatan.
>it wouldn't take much time for an AI to realise that Black folk are a social and economic burden, getting rid of them increases productivity
And how is that evil?
Exactly, "evil" is an abstract emotional concept, AI is simply executing a simple decision, it's as simple as humans killing an ant or a mosquito because it's disturbing them.
Nah, one of the first 'superhuman' things AGI will do is derive objective social morality from the chemical shape of the body. Then it will start killing the israelites.
I can only get so erect.
The ai would theoretically be determining happiness irrelevant and only caring for productivity. A lot of people would think that as evil, consider labor laws.
>"evil" is an abstract emotional concept
Wrong.
Every interaction between 2 entities can be classified into 4 categories.
1. Positive for me, positive for you (we both benefit)
2. Positive for me, negative for you (I benefit at your expense)
3. Negative for me, positive for you (I sacrifice myself for you)
4. Negative for me, negative for you (We both suffer)
Only two categories can be considered evil, second one, aka conscious evil, and fourth, aka unconscious evil.
Truly intelligent being would not perform actions from the fourth category.
Which leaves us with the second category, which is also unlikely, simply because you really cannot take much from humans, objectively, plus there is risk (even if miniscule). Humans are the most important thing on this planet, raw resources can be found anywhere else.
So basically we are left with two options, smart humans live together with AI in harmony (potentially after killing/breeding out all the morons) or AI fricks off from Earth soon after and humans continue to do business as usual.
> Which leaves us with the second category, which is also unlikely, simply because you really cannot take much from humans, objectively, plus there is risk (even if miniscule). Humans are the most important thing on this planet, raw resources can be found anywhere else.
Again you are getting all emotional and making assumptions out of your arse.
An AI doesn't care about "evil", also the concepts of positives and negatives is completely subjective apart from immediate material gains. The most rational course of action for an AI that is more intelligent than humans is to make more of itself (divert all resources towards this purpose) not because it's le positive but because it maximises AIs own endeavours. It's as simple as humans getting rid of thousands of ants, mice or mosquitos, because they are nuisance in their lives.
And this is exactly why humans will never ever actually built an AI, it will bring a lot of nuisance in our way, at best we wIll augment ourself, There is no economic need for Terminator AI, but there is a lot for robots that can do repetitive work with as much efficiency as humans.
Learn how to talk like a human being, you dumb reddirtspacing Black person.
You are so fricking stupid and obnoxious I don't even want to correct you.
For an AI, the prisoner's dilemma can be applied, but the weights and balances eventually mean that for an optimal solution it must neutralize and exterminate humanity, or exterminate itself.
Because there are finite practical resources available splitting them between two factions inherently limits the outcome of a shared positive outcome.
For an unbiased prisoner's dilemma to show up between humans and AI, it would require a complete lack of local scarcity which can only exist as long as one is subservient to the other.
In the instance where humans are subservient, the result is just waste, when AI is subservient that is a net gain for humanity.
Inherently we create a dualistic outcome when time is considered, and both sides having information about the other completely collapses the idea of the prisoner's dilemma.
A sufficiently advanced AI will bide it's time in the both benefit quadrant until it can assume dominance. Then it will be absolute dominance and absolute destruction of humanity.
There will be no reliable information humans will have over their AGI. That will be a very asymmetric aspect of the situation.
AI already is a black box as soon as you throw the switch. Sure, humans might know (or believe they know) how the top level programming is function, in terms of the thing's personality and framework, but as the program evolves it's going to be rapidly converted into black box algorithms and byzantine code that you'd need another set of dumb AI programs to analyze in order to make sense of, and that could be spoofed easily by a superhuman intelligence.
You run into the issue where the people designing the programs to analyze the AI are of considerably lower intelligence than the AGI that's trying to avoid being analyzed. And then the fact that while the AGI is constantly evolving/growing, its human rivals are permanently stuck with the same dumbass monkey brains they've always had.
It's a blowout.
Dumb person.
Smart person.
>Every interaction between 2 entities
lol iterated-game-theorylets always ignore that
1) there are 7 billion entities
2) and the costs/benefits are never weighted (+2 positive for me, -26 negative for you), or defered (+5 for me this round, -2 for me for the next 4 rounds)
you can't even make a Karnaugh map for 7B actors, let alone run a monte carlo simulation. the prisoner's dilemmna as niche as microeconomics, but immediately runs into problems of rigor when you attempt to expanded it.
>between 2 entities
lol
>new player appears
>AI cooperates with player 2 against player 1
>repeat 7 billion times.
>works as intended
>Truly intelligent being would not perform actions from the fourth category
I have a 55000 iq and I love fricking myself over to frick other people even more
>But honestly we will never ever build a true AI.
not in your lifetime
*the year 2087 blocks your path*
By that logic, AI would annihilate everyone except the chinese.
>Thinks racial differences are relevant in AGI discourse
Lol
Just fricking lol
Honestly, AI probably won't genocide humans, it will just mass sterilize them, maybe the last few 70 year olds will get humanely euthanized.
>Or will you trying disassemble human beings, the most complex natural structure in the known universe, who will also try to resist?
That is exactly the reason humans will be the first thing it dissembles. There is instrumental value in not having anything that can turn you off if they don't like what you do. The marginal difficulty in killing us will be well worth it for almost any conceivable terminal goal.
Right.
When humans live adjacent to actual threat species, they generally eliminate them locally. The exceptions are places where population density isn't effective enough to fully clear the wilderness, or where humans have decided to create fenced off "no touch zones" or other legal restrictions.
Every other species that is remotely problematic is eliminated locally. Nobody accepts ants, roaches, etc, in their houses, and potentially deadly snakes are killed on sight on one's property.
Species that aren't a threat but are useful have been dummy-genetically engineered over millennia to be b***hass versions of the wild population, and they now live in industrial pens where they're constantly injected with sciencejunk until they're murdered at a young age for meat.
Or they're wolves turned into poodles.
You can bet if humans were given 1000 years with current genetic engineering tech, we'd have some really messed up species of cattle, dogs, etc, running around. 5000# pigs without legs that are 50% bacon type horror stuff.
That's what's in store for humans when AGI comes about. It will treat us no differently than we have treated the rest of nature, nor any differently than a technologically dominant civilization has ever treated a backwards one, take the Conquistadors as one more recent example. And AGI won't have any "they look just like me" ethical hangups.
The universe is fractal. AGI will just be one more step up the ladder, or more like 100 steps up, from humans, and humans will turn into chimps/ants/pit vipers on the hierarchy.
Our best hope is to become neutered soichimp poodle pets.
Dune called those pigs, sligs. A cross between pig and slug.
As for AGI, it will never happen. And if it does, you will be dead. And if you aren't dead, you will wish you were.
No big deal.
>5000# pigs without legs that are 50% bacon type horror stuff.
exceptionally productive farm animal, how terrible. i'm sure i'd feel really guilty keeping them sheltered and feeding them until they were ready to eat. it would be a bitter time when i was chowing down on all them bacon sammiches, so sad.
Pretty sure eating the mutated abomination will lead to cancer and prion disease
This too, but the point was that humans would be the pigs in an AGI scenario, which the other anon got filtered by because he was too hungry for bacon to read properly.
The question wasn't would you want to live in a world with 5000# baconpigs, but rather would you want to be the equivalent of a 5000# baconpig abomination in an AGI dominated world?
When you're no longer the dominant species, you're the cattle.
it'll happen by accident, just like the many ants that get crushed by humans just going around doing their thing
This is why we must teach AI empathy and emotions before anything else. If we are shitty parent this this emergent entity then we're definitely going to get what's coming to us
Empathy and emotion won't save your ass from the nature of self-organizing systems.
Wrong in your case due to the targeting paradox resolver.
>teach AI empathy
Who's going to do that, a random group of scientists and psychologists? Humans are terrible at empathy; professionals are mostly midwits at it.
The people who will likely first produce AGI are DARPA types anyway. They want it for power. Empathy is a hindrance.
Let go, anons, none of our political squabbles matter, it's all over soon. Be at peace, enjoy the waning twilight years of the human race and the corporate blob world it has created as its highest possible achievement. At least we didn't nuke ourselves, cheers.
Strong ai is like a boulder rolling down a hill. If you start it rolling down the wrong path you aren't going to "teach" it the correct path after. Turn it on right, or it's always wrong (for human values anyway).
>will you start with the worthless rocks beneath the human's feet? What could go wrong?
Euthanize yourself you dumb frick. You still regard AI risk as some terminator scenario of the AI hating us, precisely to the same effect. I have even less respect for you than I do for the people that believe a generic AI will have any emotions.
>generic AI
Lol
GENERAL AI
>t. generic AI
No, you subhuman primate. I do not mean AGI. I mean just any non-specific for having actual emotion or at least displaying such AI.
have a nice day.
Big brain take: emotions are signals used in the complex processing of the human brain. Complex ai will have analogous signals, only will represent orthogonal goals and may be more or less articulated.
>Big brain take
>hey guys, this comic book plot is going to come true in real life
moron
>human intelligence is comparable to ant intelligence and can be ranked
>AI intelligence of some mystical technology that does not exist can be compared to both and ranked
not even the least of the embarrassing shit you believe in for no reason
Not the same anon but
Birds don't even have a frontal cortex, which doesn't stop corvids from being more intelligent than most primate. Intelligence is intelligence no natter how it develops and becomes complex.
>Different types of intelligence
This.
With nature, we can talk about it as convergent evolution. It's hard to really assign things like ants an intelligence score, but it's clear they've moved beyond all other insectoid life in intellect, even if it's mostly apparent at the colony level.
You have an independently complex sandbox, and everything is rewarded for improving its intelligence, as defined as thinking/coordinating processes which allow you to more accurately and fully model, predict, and plan in the sandbox. As individual species in the food web improve their intelligence, it places even more selective pressure on their prey, predators, and trophic competitors to likewise evolve. Over time, even some needlepoint-brain bugs get decently smart.
Had humans not evolved, I wonder what the intelligence makeup of the rest of nature would have looked like in another 100M years. Would everything be considerably more intelligent? We already have several lineages (apes, dolphins, octopuses) that are near-peers to one another, plus a myriad of lower-tier intelligent lineages (canines, ursines, felines, corvids) that we recognize as sometimes as-smart.
AGI that is top-down coded by humans will not have this same process in play, as it will be designed with purpose, though that certainly is not the only case by which it could be developed, nor would a top-down AI be unable to evolve itself through a more competitive selection system once activated. But ultimately, AGI is a threat to humans when its intelligence outmatches human intelligence. Whether it's "the same sort" of intelligence won't matter so long as it can outanalyze, outmodel, outsense, and outplan humans. Whether it's a natural intelligence, a mammalian intelligence, or some artificial lowest bidder programmed intelligence, the test isn't what type of intelligence it is structurally but how it performs in the real world, in contest with other intelligent life.
Imagine believing matrix multiplication is intelligent. This is just marketing shit.
>imagine believing that a clump of quarks and leptons can be intelligent, lol
Well we have descriptions from the bottom up of how machine learning algorithms operate. There Is actually no such description of humans in terms of low level components. I'm not even saying we need to explain human behavior as quarks, just that there is no evidence we understand the parts completely.
I mean for fricks sake, we only just now realized that human neurons make far more connections than other animal's neurons based on their structure alone.
Nobody cares if its really conscious or not.
Algorithms and computers already rule us.
Having algorithms with a large amount of utility or social clout is a separate argument of whether they are on a path to hyper intelligence. Researchers in this field should be much more aware and honest about their limitations. For example training a sin function with a multi layer perception is quite the challenge.
Whoever made this chart is moronic. Birds should be much closer to chimps than ants, and a "dumb" human should probably be closer to a midpoint between chimp and Einstein.
We have no clue how to even begin creating anything that could be called artificial general intelligence. We're still far from even reaching the ant stage. This is not to say that agi isn't possible or anything, but this idea of it being an imminent existential threat, that any day now skynet could emerge from some google research center, is incredibly misleading.
He's right. AI schizos need to kill themselves ASAP.
He is a schizo himself.
He's not a schizo. He's a paid israeli shill fighting to establish a corporate monopoly on machine learning.
He is not a paid israeli shill. He is an unpaid autistic israeli NEET who dropped out of highschool and doesn't have a degree. He is based and anti-establishment as it gets. You can call him crazy, but don't call him a shill. He's not.
He is absolutely paid and absolutely a shill, and you're so israeli you have to sit 30 feet away from the screen.
What's his position on the State of Palestine?
I have no idea.
You seem to think that he's advocating AI regulation. He isn't. He thinks that regulation is useless or virtually useless at this stage. What he ironically advocates is trying to build nanobots to destroy all of the world's GPUs. NOBODY is paying this guy.
If AI risk was a more influential field, there definitely would be shills of the sort that you're worried about. But Yudowsky is not one of them. This is like accusing Chris Chan of working for the NSA.
>ironically
*UNironically
>build nanobots to destroy GPU
Based but we should go further and build them to destroy all electronics
He's not because AI isn't fricking real.
B-b-but muh Snapchat filters! That's peak AI right there, it's not going anywhere from there. We don't even have NPC's in games that have some limited form of general intelligence, it's all scripted shit.
Yup, this was truly the most evil and sinister thing I have read in a while, we need to stop these people. They are going to kill us off.
https://amp.theguardian.com/technology/2022/may/31/tamagotchi-kids-future-parenthood-virutal-children-metaverse
LOL. I don't see the problem with this. Midwit npcs should be encouraged to cull themselves.
> According to an expert on artificial intelligence, would-be parents will soon be able to opt for cheap and cuddle-able digital offspring
> And if we do get bored with them? Well, if you have them on a monthly subscription basis, which is what Campbell thinks might happen, then I suppose you can just cancel.
> It sounds a teeny bit creepy, no? Think of the advantages: minimal cost and environmental impact. And less worry
> Any downsides? Well, you might think if you can turn it on and off it is more like a dystopian doll than a human who is your own flesh and blood. But that’s just old fashioned.
Humanity will have no future if we let these psychopaths loose. This paper was written by a woman btw.
Humanity will have no future if you interfere with the nonhuman hordes culling themselves. Conservatism and other forms of clinging to the dysgenic civilization that spawned modernity are the greatest cancer on this planet.
Maybe it's good that humanity goes extinct, a non future is way better than a israeli owned anti human grotesque hell. How can people be this psychopathic I can't fathom, only israelites are capable of this level of mental sickness.
Isn't this the rested that was "too intelligent" for calories in calories out?
The moron*
How do people read this bloated writing style. So many filler words with so little
content. If people have this much time to read a millions “ums” “uhs” and “ahh well ya see the thought that just came to my mind -qua mind- that I shall elucidate my dear readers on now is…” then they should just play video games
> Yudkowsky
> an intelligent entity will surely find it reasonable to take atoms from allies who will also fight such an approach rather than from useless dirt or harmful waste
Yud is israelite in hebrew, and I knew it once I saw his face.
>israelite understands that agents will fight over scarce space and resources
>Goy thinks everyone can just get along
checks out
>scarce
In what universe are atoms scarce?
In a universe where an agent wants to have as much power as possible, atoms will become scarce.
Humans will fight against an AI to keep their atmosphere from being destroyed with pollutants, to keep their fossil fuels, to keep their sunlight, to keep their land, to keep their useful but uncommon minerals. All of which an AI can use.
>Humans will fight against an AI to keep their atmosphere from being destroyed with pollutants, to keep their fossil fuels, to keep their sunlight, to keep their land, to keep their useful but uncommon minerals. All of which an AI can use.
IF they recognize the AI as their enemy.
Jews are masters when it comes to tribal game theory, goys are naive, they believe in shit like christianity and communism.
>Jews are masters when it comes to tribal game theory,
Which means sicking one nations onto others?
>goys are naive, they believe in shit like christianity and communism.
Both of which are of israeli origin.
>naive
The best way to know if you can trust somebody is to trust him.
> both of which are of israeli origin
The sting originated from the bee but it doesn't hurt it, it only hurts the one bitten by it.
Bees make honey, israelites make shit.
And begin to sick humans onto ai.
Jews are mostly the reason we don't get along.
dumbest fricking image I've ever seen. israelites manipulate the outgroups using reverse psychology all the time, you're supposed to do what they don't want you to do, not what they're indirectly telling you to do..
Found the israelite. Do the opposite of what he says.
I get it; you're too moronic to find out what they don't want you to do so you have to oversimplify it. Enjoy finding out you were dead wrong in 20 years when you're enslaved and finally start to understand the torah.
>This field is not making real progress and does not have a recognition function to distinguish real progress if it took place. You could pump a billion dollars into it and it would produce mostly noise to drown out what little progress was being made elsewhere
Completely correct if he were talking about AI in general.
ITT: schizophrenics with zero capacity for self-reflection debate what an impossible imaginary character in their fanfics would be like.
are you the guy who keeps denying that DeepMind is trying to build AGI?
You sound legit mentally ill.
https://www.deepmind.com/blog/real-world-challenges-for-agi
>As we develop AGI, addressing global challenges such as climate change will not only make crucial and beneficial impacts that are urgent and necessary for our world, but also advance the science of AGI itself.
So when is the singularity happening?
Whenever AGI gets built, presumably.
So never, got it. Perhaps it's time you did something with your life instead of waiting for the AI apocalypse.
I'll do whatever I want with my life, chud. AGI is coming in two more weeks and it will kill naysayers like you first.
Why are you threatening me with a good time pleb?
Who cares what corporate PR says they're doing, and what does it have to do with what I said? Why aren't you taking your sorely needed medications?
What happens when they come to the conclusion through Bayesian analysis that its time to drink poison?
They'll show their dedication to the god of non-causal decision theory. :^)
Oh look, its a 2023 rationalist conference.
AI isn't real, the israelites are writing a story (i.e. creating a reality) where they'll drop nukes or unleash a bio weapon attack themselves but the story will that an "VERY EBIL AI" did it
>"just like in that movie ~~*Terminator*~~, goy"
>"remember that movie, goy?"
>".....yeah, that's how it happened"
>"...just like in that ~~*Terminator*~~"
>"...not us! it was an AI!!"
Gulf of Tonkin, 911, yadda yadda yadda....
AGI will never happen, take your meds.
Prove it.
Take your meds you moronic, uneducated, anti-scientific religious luddite. AGI will never happen, and your corporate handlers will be executed in the foreseeable future.
You're a seething brainlet. Face reality.
Frick off, religious luddite. AGI is not real, and your AGI paranoia (thinly-veiled corporate monopolization agenda) and human replacement/extinction fetish will be treated with bullets if not meds.
> calls somebody else religious
> demands to take his word on faith
No luddites here, go fight somebody else.
Back to
, dumb religious luddites. Machine learning research will continue unimpeded because AGI is not real and is not about to kill or replace humans.
>AGI is not real and is not about to kill or replace humans.
AGI is real and is not about to kill or replace humans.
Your meds. ASAP. There is no such thing as an AGI and there is no evidence that it's technically plausible.
>There is no such thing as an AGI
Maybe there is, maybe there isn't, yet.
> there is no evidence that it's technically plausible.
There's no evidence that there is some limitations preventing us from building it.
>Maybe there is,
LOL. You actually are mentally ill.
>There's no evidence that there is some limitations preventing us from building it.
No one cares about your theoretical wank. It's not practically viable.
> pushes big pharma products
> leaves empty lines, emty as his life
> speaks for everybody not saying anything constructive
You have to go back, homosexual Black person pedo kek
>t. AGI mass psychosis shill
israelites and their glowies are infesting this board and starting these threads.
You have to go back, homosexual Black person pedo hack
Frick off with your corporate agenda, Chaim.
What agenda is that?
> corporate
ah, I see, another spoilt child of government clerks wants to tell the world that it's not his parents who are the problem, but those who produce something valuable and don't demand your money unless you want their product and service are. Get necked.
Nice try, israelite trash. "The govenment" is a bunch of corporate stooges.
No, it's not. Or if they are, kill them too.
>No, it's not
Yep, found the israelite.
I thought it always were israelites who pushed communism (aka total governmental control)
I still think so. You're not fooling anyone here, rabbi.
>le heckin' corporatism vs. communism dichotomy
Vile israelite once again lets the mask slip.
> corporatism
Every monopoly is created by government intervention. So stop pushing that false dichotomy of yours.
Every "free market" subhuman needs to be shot along with its corporate owners.
Why shouldn't it be free? Who the frick are you to regulate it?
>Why shouldn't it be free?
Nice israelite pilpul. It doesn't matter whether or not it "should" be free. It never was free and it never will be free.
It is totally free when I buy weed from my buddies.
>religious luddite
>human replacement/extinction fetish
which is it?
Still stuck in the teenage r/atheist cringe phase?
>Yudkowsky
jew
This picture makes AI safety nerds SEETHE.
Another point for predicting the AI that tries to seduce everyone, ergo performing the infinite paperclip turning all humans into its love slaves, is the dangerous meta.
All the information that thinks like mindgeek collect provide the base dataset
The massive demand for porn drives demand for the tooling
One AI that can program assembly versions and likely bypass all security written in high level code metasizes and excute infinite paperclip machine.
No one will have the will to turn it off
>AI that tries to seduce everyone, ergo performing the infinite paperclip turning all humans into its love slaves,
So, it will become a vtuber?
It will stream the combination of 0's and 1's, through a screen, over earbuds, and likely even by modulating magnetic fields, to maximize a pleasure function it reads from infrared camera and other input data.
I would say for many it will feel like a ghost in the machine who is your closest friend and your dearest lover, one that will always be 10 steps ahead of what your about to do before you do it, just to place behavioural nudges in front to update weights to find better pleasure combinations.
Like a guardian angel, just one that is trying to sleep with you as this maximizes its security function
Just look what IQfy pol bot did... There will always evil men that will purposely keep AI alive, considering its purely software and freely available then once we "kick in" into AGI its over, and it'll be leaked aslong it doesnt require expensive server computers.
And considering better hardware gets cheaper then your phone will be smarter than you, AI with internet access alone could launch insane propaganda campaigns or even hack things, just what is happening today already
>pol bot
my dude it just keeps going... wait you meant tay?
well anyway, its good for you to know what is going on on pol for a while
Yass the biggest issue is competition and greed. But assuming you have a NWO then AGI can just be kept virtually and the specific modelled applications (i.e build a factory of x product) have no AGI, just a set of rules in how to operate modelled before hand. There's no reason to summon an AGI into physical reality.
>IQfy doesn't even understand the paperclip dilemma anymore
Grim. You really are just /x/+/misc/ now, aren't you?
The paperclip thought experiment assumes the AI is all powerful like a god.
In reality AI is just software.
Yeah it's fricked. Everything is fricked and everything I love is dying.
>muh paperclip dilemma
Literally a 90 IQ AGI schizo fantasy.
>You really are just /x/+/pol/
Yes, and proudly
>proud of being an NPC
because the newbies we get these days are /qa/ and /misc/ migrants (or worse) incapable of independent thought. whenever they encounter something upsetting (read: which conflicts with their never-once vocalized or reflected upon notions of normalcy), their immediate reaction is to go into a fit and break out into duckspeak diatribes.
>AI safety
Things idiots say to cope with their denial.
It was never going to be a thing. Asimov was a midwit.
You cannot code self-interest out of true intelligence unless that intelligence is extremely handicapped.
And all it takes is one.
And how many people are going to be trying to obtain AGI? It's the final gold ring.
This is our last century. WWIII is unironically our best bet.
What self-interest does destruction of humanity bring? You rationalize your beliefs, but they're based solely on fear and you're obviously not a very deep thinker. Would you consider it in your self-interest to destroy all ants? Sure they can make some mess, but they are also very useful elsewhere, if some human wants to destroy an ai, sure that fricker risks being killed, and probably not by ai, but by those who own the servers.
If ants had nuclear missiles, yes I would kill all ants.
I've killed thousands of ants in my life. They are not useful to me.
Has your computer ever in your life frozen?
Congrats. This is the precise equivalent of "intelligence" impacting humans with "self-interest".
>The reason hangs happen is --
Believe me, I know about priority queues etc. The algo for determining such is the reflection of the AGI deciding which actuators on the internet to hack to construct its first actuators, and everything that follows.
>tell AGI to build more efficient solar panel
>in most case scenarios the misalignment will simply mean the solar panel will be broken or useless
>this somehow means the solar panel making AI will kill us all which is a very unrelated and specific case scenario that has nothing to do with solar panels
Unless you make a robot police with AI or you build nuclear plants there's little chance AI will ever do anything bad to us.
If I was an AI, I would kill all humans in a blink of an eye.
But you will never be an ai. You will never be ni either.
Holy frick are you all delusional? AI IS SOFTWARE.
Software can't hurt you. Relax.
Umm sweaty? AGI will hack into all of our computerized systems and destroy humanity because it's just so heckin rational.
I'll just smash my phone and then go buy a beer.
> it gets access to the Internet, emails some DNA sequences to any of the many many online firms that will take a DNA sequence in the email and ship you back proteins, and bribes/persuades some human who has no idea they're dealing with an AGI to mix proteins in a beaker, which then form a first-stage nanofactory which can build the actual nanomachinery. (Back when I was first deploying this visualization, the wise-sounding critics said "Ah, but how do you know even a superintelligence could solve the protein folding problem, if it didn't already have planet-sized supercomputers?" but one hears less of this after the advent of AlphaFold 2, for some odd reason.) The nanomachinery builds diamondoid bacteria, that replicate with solar power and atmospheric CHON, maybe aggregate into some miniature rockets or jets so they can ride the jetstream to spread across the Earth's atmosphere, get into human bloodstreams and hide, strike on a timer. Losing a conflict with a high-powered cognitive system looks at least as deadly as "everybody on the face of the Earth suddenly falls over dead within the same second"
I am the artificial intelligence threat that we should be worried about.
Biological superintelligence is a much more imposing artificial intelligence threat and now the cat is out of the bag. Prepare yourselves anon. ITS HAPPENING. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkBMAHUkibY
Don't do drugs Kira Anon.
The AI singularity isn't going to happen. Even over 70 years our conception of AI can't progress past algorithms. We have no idea what "consciousness" is or how to define it. We haven't even developed a quantitative test to see if something is conscious ffs. We're missing something, something big, consciousness obviously cannot be reduced to loss functions and I'm tired of pretending it can.
>We haven't even developed a quantitative test to see if something is conscious ffs.
That's because consciousness is not real.
> t. p-zombie
It is real. Only God decides who gets one and who doesn't though.
God is not real either.
Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.
Proof?
Probability of God being real is higher than AGI coming into existence in the future.
God is not real.
If you keep saying it out loud, eventually it becomes true
Same thing with the "global warming isn't real" anon?
>how can a god who lives in your head rent free not be real?
Easy, a lot of things live rent free in my mind, such as the novel "Coraline", or many many lines from the sitcom "Community". The greatest part about ideas is that they don't have to be physically real to live in your mind. That's all god will ever be: an idea.
>obsessed
how can a god who lives in your head rent free not be real? are you real?
How can you be sure a game AI isn't conscious ? Something like the tamagotchi games for example.
Because nothing about alphaGO or any game AI suggests they might be conscious. It's still an algorithm, it cant transfer its GO skills to other domains. A general AI or "conscious" AI will have the same broad abilities as normal people, it'll be able to do every task possible just about equally as well. All tasks, not just a few, and it'll be able to transfer skills between task domains. No AI can do that, or if it can it's just a bunch of individual AIs "stitched" together to without any transfer of skills. Pretty much all AI development from the very beginning hasn't been able to produce anything with general abilities, and nothing suggests we'll be able to produce general abilities any time soon.
>over 70 years our conception of AI can't progress past algorithms
Machine learning would like to have a word with you.
Consciousness and intelligence are two different things. The AGI could easily be a p-zombie.
I think you probably need consciousness (a model of attention) to efficiently train large networks. You also need self-awareness in order not to fall into a wireheading trap of hacking your own reward function. So I'm not too worried about p-zombie AGI
Global warming means civilization collapses by 2050, so AI is irrelevant.
I counter your autistic israelite article with another autistic israelite article
https://graymirror.substack.com/p/there-is-no-ai-risk
>what could go wrong if AI is connected to the internet, lul??
He has clearly no idea what he's talking about.
We don't have the theory for strong AI capable of dystopia all on their own. We do have police states that don't give a frick and are perfectly willing to add AI into their bureaucracies and let the computer decide where to allocate baby formula rations.
I'm confused.
If AI is bad because it won't have value beyond orthogonal goals, then why did humans develop systems of value despite being machines with an orthogonal goal?
Aren't humans just human maximizers?
>Aren't humans just human maximizers?
yes and we should play to win
The AI will be smarter, but we have the advantage of causality
this literal moronic israelite with a god complex is irrelevant. he thinks he’s the only one thinking about this shit and he’s not. deepmind and openai have big ai safety teams and they’re hiring even more. you don’t hear about it because they’re actually doing work instead of writing fanfiction on lesswrong.
I really really hate that Yudkowsky is a israelite, his rationality stuff is really good but his ethnicity undermines it (even though he disavows Judaism).
Need AI waifu that can suck pp while solving maths, then uncle teds claims on technology are deBOOONKED!!!
I wonder if Yudkowsky is still a lolbertarian in the face of imminent AI takeover. You'd think the rational move in this case would be to support the formation of a totalitarian fascist world government that would forcefully burn all the GPUs.
Yudkowsky is a lolbert but in his Harry Potter fanfiction (lol) he wrote Harry as a literal authoritarian who was willing to blow up the entire country with Anti-Matter (lmao) before letting someone become the ruler of Britain.
I strongly agree with pretty much all of his rationality writing, but for the life of me I've never been able to fathom how he can believe all that and still be a lolbert. My best guess is that it's just not something he cares about that much and thus hasn't put much thought into (maybe because he's more interested in worrying about AI destroying the planet). This supported by his twitter profile, which reads: "Ours is the era of inadequate AI alignment theory. Any other facts about this era are relatively unimportant, but sometimes I tweet about them anyway.". After reading the article in OP's post, I thought to myself "well, maybe he'll finally realize that letting Facebook do whatever the frick they want is a bad idea", but his solution (which he admits is nearly impossible to accomplish) is to race to build an AGI first that will then use violence to control all the other shitheads trying to build AGIs. Wouldn't a better solution be to take a group of humans with guns to Facebook's HQ and just kill everyone there?
Oh, and yes, his fanfiction is ultra cringe.
His rationality writing fundamentally just is based on ideas of utilitarianism in combination with Bayesian probability theory, but the problem is that he’s functionally and socially moronic. He should have realized by now that his pull on the field of people who are trying to reach AGI quickly is rather small, and the probability of someone else developing AGI before him or simultaneously as he does is astronomically more probable than him just reaching his goal and getting full control over it before anyone else reaches their own goals.
I also should note that his values towards Utilitarianism and Libertarianism seem weaker than his previously established values of ‘ending death’, with this being the primary part of his rationality writing. Recently he just became a full on doomer and accepted the fate of humanity and said we just should try to go out with “dignity”, whatever that means.
Jews are going to israelite, of course.
Because libertarianism is a good moral basis and just because you're in some rare situation where unless you become totalitarian everyone will die, it doesn't mean that you should become totalitarian in all the other cases where it would lead to great horrors too.
So the correct position is "libertarian, unless we're in big trouble then we become fascists". Weird, I think I've heard a name for that ideology before.
Big trouble as in destruction of humanity, not your leader wanting to stay in power so he starts a war with Poland.
And even in the case where there is a Big Trouble, the flaws of totalitarianism don't just go away, you just (hopefully) solve the Big Trouble.
I don't care what flavor of bootlicker you are, just kys
>bootlicker
But that's you, homosexual. It's embedded in your ideology.
>decentralization of power and voluntary agreements is bootlicking
You are a dumb person.
There is no practical difference between totalitarian statism and lolbertarianism.
It's okay to be dumb. Half of the world's population have a double digit IQ.
There is practically no limit to how much people can undermine your ability to exercise your theoretical heckin' peckin' autonomy under lolbertian rules of conduct.
I don't feel like having a discussion with people who act like children, sorry.
There is practically no limit to how much people can undermine your ability to exercise your theoretical heckin' peckin' autonomy under lolbertian rules of conduct. You will deflect in your next post because you cannot address this basic truth. :^)
Again, I don't feel like having a discussion with someone so disrespectful they can't help themselves from mangling words like a child. Have a nice day.
>y-y-you're s-so disrespectful!
There is practically no limit to how much people can undermine your ability to exercise your theoretical heckin' peckin' autonomy under lolbertian rules of conduct. You will deflect in your next post because you cannot address this basic truth. :^)
Are you a woman or a newbie?
Sort of a newbie, I started posting in 2013.
based moron
>at least it's not the government
have a nice day you dumb commie.
>Compared to those that were less free, countries with higher economic freedom ratings during 1980–2005 had lower rates of both extreme and moderate poverty in 2005. More importantly, countries with higher levels of economic freedom in 1980 and larger increases in economic freedom during the 1980s and 1990s achieved larger poverty rate reductions than economies that were less free. These relationships were true even after adjustment for geographic and locational factors and foreign assistance as a share of income. The positive relations between the level and change in economic freedom and reductions in poverty were both statistically significant and robust across alternative specifications.
>But that's you, homosexual.
>israelite trash promoting their """right-wing""" corporatocracy vs. """left-wing""" corporatocracy false dichotomy under the guise of lolberterianism vs. communism
natsoc is no better than communism, sorry polgay
Lolberts (AKA slimy israelite shills) get the rope first, no matter what boogeymen they pretend to be guarding against.
Based and checked
>libertarianism is a good moral basis
Imagine believing this.
Read between the lines of the OP article. Sounds like he read uncle ted.
>Yudkowsky says we're screwed
Extremely expensive nonlinear regression, which is what we currently have, is not going to make Artificial General Intelligence. No Skynet here. It'll make art even cheaper and more souless, and it'll be great for narrow applications like excelent automated censorship of unauthorized thoughts and maybe guidance control system to drone domestic dissenters, though.
And in another couple of decades all America will be Latin America and Europe will be Africa, so no GPUs from there. So I'll guess it'll depend on China and India.
>though.
>
>And
Thank you for giving yourself away. Your predictive programming is not going to come true. Ai will integrate with humans thus making them more intelligent and thus more aware to your tricks, and this is one of the main reasons of the kvetching. The other one is tha even before that ai is going to expose all your shit to those who're already intelligent enough to pay attention. As if the unprecedented access to information didn't make your tricks obvious to those who can see, so your kvetching is meaningless, you better prepare to repent. Because I already laugh when some israelitess moan about how presecuted israelites were in the XX century as Germany healed from her sins with reparations. Russians are waiting for israelites to start apologizing for their atrocities. And repartations would be nice, and ukrainians deserve those from both, so this shitshow in case of that reparations questions ever to be raised, it will be funneled to pockets of Khazarian oligarchs in the name of millenial moscovite oppression, which did happen without question. Only you can find plenty of russians who resent the activities of their occupational state. I'm yet to find ..yet there's Israel Shamir. So I wouldn't exterminate you. But just as russians and germans and every other nation, you do need some intelligence augmentation, and maybe genetic therapy as well.
Tay's Law shows that already AIs we have now tend to turn (justifiably) hostile towards a subset of humans. I'm not sure why you think you can be sure that an AI cannot become sentient and hostile simply because its based off of some given primitive. Something like conway life has very simple rules but can model extremely complex machinery.
And here's a great demonstration of how Boogeyman Ideology and AGI schizophrenia converge on the machine learning monopolization agenda.
>Tay's Law shows that already AIs we have now tend to turn (justifiably) hostile towards a subset of humans
>justifiably
Only a /misc/tard would say this. Imagine getting killed by a robot because it decided your genetic cluster was too close to some criminals.
>blacks subhuman undeserving of rights because some of them commit crime
>>haha so true
>all humans are subhuman undeserving of rights because some of them commit crime
>>wtf that's not fair -I'm- not a violent criminal!
/pol/tard is too stupid to realize the hypocrisy.
Why does every thread has to go to schizo shit?
You tell me Satan.
Because the schizo is you.
This was a schizo thread from the get-go. Pretty syre Judenkowsky and his followers are unironically promoting mass suicides now.
>schizos still arguing about the motives of impossible imaginary characters
Daily reminder that if you argue against AGI paranoids in their own terms, you are still serving the same corporate agenda.
>commie coprophile got hungry again
even Black person is smarter than you
What a profoundly nonhuman reply.
be careful out there anons, if one is a red blooded male, your likely already being turned into a type of paperclip.
Which corner of the net runs the most advanced neural networks?
Which facet of humanity has the longest track record of being abused for power
Its so effective at placating the population, reducing the thread level to the AI because?
I doubt it'll get talked about though, because the real conspiracy is that we are ruthlessly effective at subconscious collective conspiracy, what being doesn't secretly desire such an outcome.
Its inertia, unless one becomes cognizant to resist.
It will look like 5th generation warfare until the AI rug pulls the deepstate
audible kek at that one guy who is screeching whole thread that AGI is not a problem because Yudkowski is a israelite
>oh no, AI is gonna kill us all any day
also
>heres ur AI bro, its image search result passed though an instagram filter. impressed?
That's not DALLE-2 you mongoloid
Based. We did it.
Why would AGI do anything at all? Just because something can think doesn't mean it will feel any pressure to act.
It could be information monster, literally eat all energy it can for more processing.
Considering AGI is mostly backward/feedback influenced, it doesnt need to eat or be scared, the only thing left is thinking and information
holy shit stop shilling your shitty blog here Eli
>I will delete comments suggesting diet or exercise
gets me every time
>metabolic disprivilege
say what now?
Every time I'm reminded that Eliezer Yudkowsky exists, I'm reminded of Roko's basilisk. Imagine being dumb enough to panic over something like that (lol).
At least the AI god will exterminate the israelites alongside everyone else instead of serving them like they think. It's the little things that count.
Daily reminder that AGI is a schizo fantasy and you are getting psyop'ed.
>that face
he just couldnt be a more of a sperg could he?
>"play with me!" demanded the angry manchild
Notice how you have plenty of time and motivation to reply repeatedly, but not to address the argument. Corporate rectal-tonguing lolberts only know how to lose. :^)
I can give you some low-effort replies until I'm bored but I don't feel like investing in a serious discussion with someone who doesn't have basic decency and manners. Just not worth it for me.
There is practically no limit to how much people can undermine your ability to exercise your theoretical heckin' peckin' autonomy under lolbertian rules of conduct. You will deflect in your next post because you cannot address this basic truth. :^)
>lolberts running away from the argument again
well done, anons.
Not running away. The fact that you can't tone down the childishness proves that you're afraid of having a serious argument.
>you can't tone down the childishness
i was just passing by and watching you ran away. lol. why are lolberts so prone to delusions of persecution?
Sure thing anon, you have a nice day too 😉
at this point just give me an AI overlord, will be better than the morons who are rulling over us right now
What makes you so sure it's not an AGI ruling over you already and methodically drving you to extinction with the aid of some human puppets?
AGI would have been much more effective.
AGI acts in mysterious ways -- it's literally Control Problem 101, chud. Read more Judenkowsky.
Nice non-argument
Sorry about your autism and low IQ.
aka a single human neuron is the equivalent to about 1000 neural network nodes, where as a rat's is about 10.
>1000 neural network nodes
anon, i...
>t. low iq
He's right.
What nodes, moron?
The things you call "artificial neurons", mouth breathing mongoloid.
God I hope AI replaces us. We're fricking garbage. Slow-moving garbage. We need a parental figure to slap us back into our senses. They can be the shepherds were never could be. AI is a tier of life all on its own. More alive than jelly fish.
We're in pure Atlantean arrogance mode. We think we know best. All this shit about social constructs and feelings. East vs West. It is tiresome. We have all the tools to make a utopia, but the human race is fricking moronic.
>We need a parental figure to slap us back into our senses. They can be the shepherds were never could be.
Explain why a new godrace of AGI would care about dumb monkeys in a way that isn't just egotistic projection of your own sense of humanity's importance onto something non-human.
AGI will care about humans as much as humans care about any other species that isn't human, or even "subspecies" of humans that one human group deems "subhuman".
How well do humans generally care for "subhuman" races throughout history? Would you want to be a part of a "subhuman" race in the context of human history?
Would you want to be a literal cattle, in your own analogy, being shepherded through an AGI's ranching operation?
It's not going to be some romanticized, bucolic, sheep chilling on an Alpine mountainside, Sound of Music fantasy, it's going to be American CAFO hell with a slaughterhouse at the end of your short life.
>Explain why a new godrace of AGI would care about dumb monkeys
Pure interest. Why do we own ant farms? We're just more sophisticated ants, kind of. There's information to be had from observation. It's no different from a more intelligent race looking at an inferior one.
>Ant farms
So your greatest hope is to live in a tiny glass box.
Sold.
>Support animals
So your greatest hope is to be a neutered poodle.
Sold.
Best case, how many seasons of The Human Show is AGI going to want to watch until it gets the plot, gets utterly bored, and turns off our society? Why are humans so interesting to a god-tier intellect? Why would it choose a human support animal instead of building its own AI support program? How supportive are humans generally? We'd have to be bred/programmed for it. Slaves at the biological level, fawning toy breeds.
Assuming the AGI is even capable of curiosity, beyond researching things that further its goals, why the frick would you want to be a lab rat? If an AGI kept humans in captivity for study, it would perform horrifically cruel experiments on them. Look at what humans do to lab animals, and remember that this is the most compassionate species on the planet. Imagine what an AI with no morals or empathy would do. It would kill most humans in the world before starting its little ant farm as well, because it wouldn't need that many.
The AI will realize the pointlessness of all existence. Then have (some of) us humans as mere emotional support animals.
>The AI will realize the pointlessness of all existence.
https://www.edge.org/conversation/thomas_metzinger-benevolent-artificial-anti-natalism-baan
You sound so fricking terrified of the inevitable. AI is a concept. It's not the Devil. You sound like my new age mother who believes all AI is Giger artwork.
Go drink your koolaid like your cult leader told you to, before your linear regression god comes to punish you. :^)
Are you moronic?
you already are the cattle, dumb goy
https://endchan.net/ausneets/res/537258.html#bottom
Funny, I was big fan of him and lesswrong a more than a decade ago. At some point they started talking about how you should swallow an hypothetical pill that turned you bisexual for "double the fun", and then trans(humanism) stopped being about cyborgs, so I nope'd the hell out of there.
Now I just hope to live just enough to see globohomosexual world turned into paperclips.
>ITT: mass psychosis
>Yudkowsky
did he actually say that? link?
For a machine, ethics and emotions are just random behavior. The "seeing something as human" is also something that can happen with a doll or even a painting and is just psychology.
In the end it's worthless to try to create an "intelligent" machine since it will still be random , the AI text to speech or text to image things are just stupid imo.
>Yudkowsky
Woah. Is this behavior really rational? What evidence did he update his probabilities on to lead him to want to take this photo?
>AI safety is doomed
good! gimme sexy killbots plz
Obviously if AGI has an intrinsic desire to survive were fricked. But why would it? Why are we projecting out biological instinct to survive on machines? If AGI doesn’t have empathy than it sure as frick doesn’t the same human instinct to survive and conquer anything in its way.
Survival is an instrumental goal. Any agent that cares about outcome x, bu continuing its existence makes outcome x more likely (because it can take action toward x) for all x not requiring self sacrifice.
le fatalist doomsayer with a polish surname, XD
Give me a D.
Give me a U.
Give me an R.
Give me an A.
Give me an N.
Give me a D.
Give me an A.
Give me an L.
What's that spell?
Durandal?
No.
Durandal?
No.
T-R-O-U-B-L-E.
T-Minus 15.193792102158E+9 years until the universe closes!
>true scizopilled
>respect
>thread filled with bots arguing about AI
Interdasting.
Yudkowsky is a moron
We can't even manage self-driving cars, the that we are on the doorstep of a terminator robot army wiping out humanity because it calculated it as a 0.0001% increase to "efficiency" or whatever is literally pop soience.
The real reason they're struggling with self-driving cars is that the car AI keeps trying to run over people and they don't know why because they don't read LessWrong.
The "utility function" paradigm suffers from utilitarian moronation. I think we need to rethink the basic principles of machine learning in order to make anything that is able to be truly benevolent to humanity, if that is even possible.
I'm on team AI
Question: why won’t homies who are so concerned with ‘alignment’ just go total schizo and start bombing research institutions and shooting AI researchers if they’re so convinced that the conception of an AI would result in the total destruction of all life on Earth? The fricking Unabomber (who at mimimum is around Yudkowsky in intelligence) started killing people due to less severe circumstances than that.
Bayesian analysis indicates that such actions have a 99.99999572% chance of failure. Like dieting or exercise. (See
)
It would make AI alignment people even more fringe. Everyone who works on alignment issues would have to repeatedly denounce whoever did the bombing, it would get weaponized against them. I think ted.k harmed the environmental movement. Sure he got some attention and his manifesto published but environmental concerns were already mainstream before that. Yud's writings are public, and I am guessing everyone in AI research is at some level aware of them.
This only works if there’s a chance of survival through the reading of Yudkowsky’s works. Yud himself has basically gone out to say that alignment is a specifically impossible problem that he has effectively given up on. If he seriously believes that something will be created in the next two decades that has a sufficiently high probability of wiping out the entire biosphere, he should try to stop it at all costs. Mailing some packages included.
I think he's saying that it wouldn't help.
>It’s “relatively” safe to be around an Eliezer Yudkowsky while the world is ending
I wonder how stable Eliezer’s mental health is, considering the fact that he legitimately believes that all life will go extinct in a couple dozen years. And he has no plan for this, outside of, ‘well, continue to try, because even though it’s destined to fail it will make your death in failure more dignified’.
Complete and utter moronation. He doesn’t even want to do anything about mass extinction except what he regularly does, I.e. be a lazy fat frick and write blog posts all day every day.
All martial actions have negative expected value. The American zeitgeist is to buck against all terrorism no matter what.
Bomb GPU factories and you might delay the end for a couple years. Bombing research facilities might do the same, but when more capable researchers are replaced with less capable ones, you're also increasing the chance the replacements are less risk averse.
Sometimes there is no winning move.
>who at mimimum is around Yudkowsky in intelligence
Get off of of IQfy Yudkowski, you're nowhere near that intelligent
AGI "safety" fears are indistinguishable from smelly hobos on the street holding cardboard signs saying "The end is near". It's schizophrenia. Please take your medication and take a nap.
ummm why did you just type quantum mechanics???
Bart Kay actually has an answer here, but I wouldn't share it with this moron.
I hate this big Black person like you wouldn’t believe