This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part. The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post! Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.
A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed." On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.
If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images). Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed. If in doubt, please post it!
User ID: 4332
No bio...
When I read the article, my understanding is that Dwarkesh is saying it's a 75% chance of superintelligence by 2032, not 2027. He did say something could spark in the next 12 months, but he did not assign specific odds for that.
p
When I read the article, my understanding is that Dwarkesh is saying it's a 75% chance of superintelligence by 2032, not 2027. He did say something could spark in the next 12 months, but he did not assign specific odds for that.
More options
Context Copy link