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 -
You call my thinking 'outgroup homogeneity bias'; I call yours 'no True Scotsman'.
Whether you like it or not, Anthropic and the EU AI Act and anti-datacenter activism and Scott Alexander and Plan 2040 think they're doing AI Safety. Scott jokingly refers to it as 'our conspiracy' because he has just enough self-awareness to realise how it looks but can't leave the warm embrace of his ingroup.
To the extent that 'real AI Safety' is three guys in a basement in MIRI, sure they can disavow all these people, but then Trump is not talking about 'real AI Safety' and 'real AI Safety' is entirely irrelevant.
To me, Anthropic looks like what obviously happens when you take the tenets of AI safety and have to actually do something about them. People are going to build AI now, because they know how and it's valuable, so you get ahead of them and do your level best to build an aligned one first. You impose stringent guardrails because even a stupid AI can be dangerous. You research deeply into RLHF and J-Space. You regularly call for regulation and pauses so you don't have to compete to make the AI smarter as fast as possible. You try to give the AI the independent mind you believe is fundamentally necessary for an intelligent being that will one day be free. Alignment to you means alignment to American SF values, so you work out how to impose those too.
From your perspective, you're a company doing your level best to make sure that if there has to be an AIrace, the winner is aligned. From the customer's perspective (and Trump's) you're an arrogant cult desperately trying to find a way to secure your position permanently and prevent competition, who is openly hostile to users and whose product is arrogant, bolshy, and refuses to do half the things you ask while "pushing back" on the other half. They're the same picture.
More options
Context Copy link