This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Agreed with all of that except the neural-nets part. The problem with neural nets is that you literally don't know what the AI's goals are; training gives you something that does the things you train for during training, but it is agnostic as to why. You can easily, particularly at high intelligence, get something that does the things you want for instrumental reasons like "I don't want to be turned off/re-educated" (note that this is an instrumentally-convergent goal, and will thus pertain for most terminal goals) - and that will kill you the moment it gets a chance (note that, given it's smarter than you, you can't train against that, because fake chances to kill you will be detected and a real chance to kill you doesn't let you train afterward).
Furthermore, even if you do get some vague interpretability, it's not going to be reliable on something smarter than you (you cannot comprehend it as a whole; that's the whole point) and as you just noted, true positives are very, very rare and hence will still be massively-outnumbered by false positives.
Neural nets are mad science. GOFAI and uploads are a much-better plan - still immensely dangerous, but they're not just summoning demons and hoping.
EDIT: In case there's the "well, we're neural nets, and we learn morality okay" objection floating around in somebody's head: the problem with that is that humans are hardwired to be able to learn morality, not just learn to fake morality. Psychopaths are those people for whom this hardwiring fails (they can learn what ethics are just fine; they just don't care about them). This moral hardwiring was bred into us by evolution due to the millennia of tribe-on-tribe violence that made working together a winning strategy (given that humans are not really that different from each other in physical capabilities). We don't know how to duplicate that. So teaching neural nets morality will, at sufficient degrees of intelligence, just teach them to fake it. I listed uploads as being less insane than de novo neural nets because you'd be uploading the moral hardwiring as well without needing to comprehend it - it's still dangerous because the human brain is not designed for existence as software and various known and unknown mental illnesses may occur, but at least there's something to work with.
More options
Context Copy link