gilmore606
1yr ago
making someone uninterested do those things will make them good
Someone who is uninterested will never become good anyway, so you might as well encourage them to do these things and find out if they are or not. I have worked 25 years in this industry and never met a developer I respected who was not in love with it.
gilmore606
1yr ago
torture for them to be forced to collaborate with relatively shitty programmers
This is mostly because we want them to notice our brilliant optimizations and beautiful abstractions in PR review, and decorate our PR with :thumbsup: and :+100: and :sunglasses: emojis. But it all just goes past them and they Approve without comment.
gilmore606
1yr ago
You can't justify morality by appealing to morality, so what basis is left beyond aesthetics?
gilmore606
1yr ago
I too am a professional software guy and nerd-from-birth much like yourself, and I basically agree with the emotional thrust of the Kriss piece. I'm not sure why you think his attitude comes from ignorance of how things work; you simply assert this as being self evident. I've been helping to build the shit machine for the past 20 years and I can see quite clearly what I've done.
gilmore606
1yr ago
People don't receive their beliefs as propositional statements, they receive them as unspoken background assumptions in other messages, and reinforcement by approval/disapproval from peers. You've misunderstood how minds are changed. Moldbug doesn't change anyone's mind either, not even the super smarties you believe can understand him.
gilmore606
1yr ago
best I can do is a deepfake of Xi Jinping pulling his eyebrows out with tweezers, take it or leave it
gilmore606
1yr ago
It's a fun problem, how to destroy all life.
Damn I feel old, but -- you may be interested in the Usenet archive of the group alt.pave.the.earth and related alt.destroy.the.earth, which consist(ed) of engineering nerds endlessly hashing out this and related questions.
gilmore606
1yr ago
These are minstrel shows.
gilmore606
1yr ago
They also assume being smart means wanting to distinguish BS. People form their visible opinions for lots of reasons other than "a singleminded dedication to discovering an accurate epistemology". In fact I would say that is hardly anyone's real goal. Smart people possibly even less so than average people, since they are smart enough to see the advantages of other strategies.
gilmore606
1yr ago
governments are very motivated to prevent tax evasion
bit of a tangent, but in light of MMT is this even true anymore?
gilmore606
1yr ago
Where are you getting all this amazing scientific data about qualia and in which organs they're felt? Up to this moment I thought qualia were a completely made up philosopher's concept with no empirical basis whatsoever.
gilmore606
1yr ago
Why are you doing this weird "oh my god look at THIS RACIST" song-and-dance here? For whom are you performing?
gilmore606
1yr ago
This is hilarious; the entire apparent point of your comment chain was to get someone else to speak plainly. But for you it's okay to be arch and clever and whatever.
gilmore606
1yr ago
I’m of the opinion that the overwhelming majority of tech startups are overvalued and only existed as a result of absurdly low interest rates that no longer exist.
Speaking as a software contractor who primarily works for startups, and lost a client yesterday due to SVB, I would say this is not just your opinion but the general understanding of how all this works. Nobody in my world is particularly surprised by any of this; it's just how the wheel turns.
gilmore606
1yr ago
I don't think that giving them rights would turn out to be particularly controversial IRL
It would if there's a huge amount of money to be made by not giving them rights. Which is the point of mmacevedo.
gilmore606
1yr ago
christ, imagine how this would butcher IlForte's posts. now I want to see it.
gilmore606
1yr ago
It makes it more likely that people will adopt the attitude that there's no point in containing AI since if I don't do it, someone else will.
but...that is obviously true. And was always obviously true. And you're saying it's bad if more people come to this true conclusion?
gilmore606
1yr ago
Yes this! We have an entire forum site here and we have one thread per week. It's absurd. Why do we do this? datasecretslox seems to work just fine as a normal forum.
gilmore606
1yr ago
is always available in real life.
A bit of plandemic should fix that if it becomes a problem; we've already had the test run.
gilmore606
1yr ago
An AI that gets 'frustrated' at its own limitations against the real world and it's solution is to just sand off all the sharp edges that are giving it problems.
I'm obligated to point out that this already happened, the AI was capitalism, the sharp edges were all direct human interactions, and our atomized broken society is the result.
gilmore606
1yr ago
I thought I got this idea from Mark Fisher or Nick Land, but random googling isn't leading me to any obvious writing of theirs on this specific concept. Come to think of it maybe it was one of IlForte's pithier comments. Regardless you should read both of them.
gilmore606
1yr ago
The thing is, when the ElsaGate videos first came to light, my first thought was: "Clearly a proto-AI is optimizing children's videos for views and is varying all possible parameters to find maxima". I still think this is very possible. So I'm not sure
beautiful only insofar as they were created by humans
necessarily applies. And even if it's not an AI doing this, isn't this pretty clearly what the mystery third-world video producers are doing? Many of these videos show up in variant forms with small deviations, suggesting multivariate testing. I guess you could be optimistic and choose to see this as the human artistic spirit, but it seems a lot more like Molochian profit maximization to me.
Once GPT can make credible videos I expect to see far more ElsaGate styled content, and not just targeted at kids.
gilmore606
1yr ago
What if we make the ASI and it tells us not to trip dawg, it has our back?
I mean, it's certainly going to tell you that regardless. The most likely human extinction scenario isn't the AI building superweapons, it's "Cure cancer? No problem, just build this incomprehensible machine, it cures cancer for everyone, everywhere. Take my word for it." The whole issue with alignment is that even if we think we can achieve it, there's no way to know we actually did, because any superintelligent AI is going to do a perfect job of concealing its perfidy from our idiot eyes.
If at some point you see the headline "AI Alignment: Solved!", we are 100% doomed.
gilmore606
1yr ago
He exhibits empathy, love, and a vision of
You don't think maybe he has image consultants and PR flacks who assist him in curating this image which just happens to appeal to the subrational impulses of people such as yourself?
But generally, Sam Altman come's off as literally me, but smarter, less willing to cede humanity to nonhuman intelligences, and more careful.
Are people really this credulous? Sam Altman's previous scam company was WorldCoin, an attempt to create a cryptocoin tied to a global digital ID which would also involve him becoming super duper rich. He doesn't give a fuck about AI qua AI, he gives a fuck about being super duper rich.
Oh me too. I just hope I don't find out I was one of them.
More options
Context Copy link