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 -
I posted, but deleted this in response to a previous AI thread, but I think it actually aged better with Elon's signature to the letter yesterday and Yud's oped:
I am not a Musk fanboy, but I'll say this, Elon Musk very transparently cares about the survival of humanity as humanity, and it is deeply present down to a biological drive to reproduce his own genes. Musk openly worries about things like dropping birth rates, while also personally spotlighting his own rabbit-like reproductive efforts. Musk clearly is a guy who wants and expects his own genes to spread, last and thrive in future generations. This is a rising tides approach for humans Musk has also signaled clearly against unnatural life extensions.
“I certainly would like to maintain health for a longer period of time,” Musk told Insider. “But I am not afraid of dying. I think it would come as a relief.”
and
"Increasing quality of life for the aged is important, but increased lifespan, especially if cognitive impairment is not addressed, is not good for civilization."
Now, there is plenty, that I as a conservative, Christian, and Luddish would readily fault in Musk (e.g. his affairs and divorces). But from this perspective Musk certainly has large overlap with a traditionally "ordered" view of civilization and human flourishing.
Altman, on the other hand has no children, and as a gay man, never will have children inside of a traditional framework (yes I am aware many (all?) of Musks own children were IVF. I am no Musk fanboy).
I certainly hope this is just my bias showing, but I have greater fear for Altman types running the show than Musks because they are a few extra steps removed from stake in future civilization. We know that Musk wants to preserve humanity for his children and his grandchildren. Can we be sure that's anymore than an abstract good for Altman?
I'd rather put my faith in Musks own "selfish" genes at the cost of knowing most of my descendants will eventually be his too than in a bachelor, not driven by fecund sexual biology, doing cool tech.
Every child Musk pops out is more the tightly intermingled his genetic future is with the rest of humanity's.
In Yud's oped, which I frankly think contains a lot of hysteria, mixed among a few decent points, he says this:
I'm unclear whether this is Yud's bio-kid or a step kid, but the point ressonates with my perspective of Elon Musk. A few days ago SA indicated a similar thing about a hypothetical kid(?)
In either case, I don't know about AI x-risk. I am much more worried about 2cimerafa's economic collapse risk. But in both scenarios I am increasingly of a perspective that I'll cheekily describe as "You shouldn't get to have a decision on AI development unless you have young children". You don't have enough stake.
I have growing distrust of those of you without bio-children eager or indifferent to building a successor race or exhaulting yourself through immortal transhumanist fancies.
To be honest, I fail to see the step(s) between "database on steroids aces tests made largely to test people remembering various shit" and "my daughter would be murdered before reaching adulthood".
tens of billions of dollars of capital and lots of top talent spend the next 5-10 years making these systems more and more capable.
They get deployed everywhere because they are way easier to work with than humans.
Humans have little economic power.
The world becomes more complex, and full of agents smarter than humans, working full-time to manipulate them.
Humans are eventually stripped of power, just like we gradually came to dominate every species less smart than us.
Let me guess - you are thinking you have tons of economic power right now? And nothing in the current events makes you question this assumption? Or maybe you think you don't depend right now on a myriad of complex machines (though you probably don't understand them as machines, yet they are) and if any of them goes haywire - e.g. for some reason, some CIA analyst decides you are Bin Laden confidante, or your credit rating file gets deleted by a freak accident, or you criticize your government one time too many at a wrong time - your life wouldn't suddenly become very hard and complicated? So yes, the list of these machines becomes a bit different. That's it?
The world will become more complex - try to explain modern law to an ancient Sumerian, and he'd probably laugh at you and then declare you and all your brethren a society of insane masochists. Complexity of human affairs is raising for millenia. We are learning to deal with it, though it's not always easy (thus existential angst is to popular). Still don't see how this means that all children going to be murdered in less than 20 years.
I'm not claiming all children are going to be murdered in less than 20 years. I also don't think I have tons of economic power right now, and I agree I already depend on complex machines that I already can't understand or control.
I'm saying we're probably giving up what little control we had over the future of human civilization. Maybe a good analogy is: we're inviting unlimited immigration from a country with unlimited population, willing to work 24h/d for cents per hour, and are far more capable, loyal, and dependable than almost any human. Once we start, we'll never be able to stop.
Well, you personally aren't, but Yudkowski is. Or at least this is implied since there's no special reason to select his child from others to be murdered, one can reasonably conclude whatever applies to his child also applies to all other children.
I don't think so. At least not anything we have. I am also not sure who is in control "over the future of human civilization" right now, because so far whoever they are, they're not doing spectacular job. I mean, 18-th century war in the middle of Europe? Dudes, you were supposed to be so past that. Our only response to a threat like pandemic seems to be "let's try fascism, whatever will happen it'd be better with fascism, right?" Our solution to raising energy needs seems to be "let's try to shut down our most effective ways of getting energy and then invest heavily into ways that we know for a fact wouldn't satisfy our needs, and then let's shame each other for having needs. Oh, and destroying classical cultural artifacts on the way doesn't hurt too, just for fun". I'm not feeling there's any entity or entities that do anything that can be reasonably called "in control", but if they are - I certainly have no input into that and no reasonable way to ever get any close to having any input into that. So tell me again what I should be afraid of losing?
We're not able to stop writing, or using electricity, or modern medicine. But that doesn't mean any of those lead us to catastrophic consequences.
That's a good point. I'd like to spend more time thinking about in which senses this is true. However, I do still think we have a lot to lose. I.e. I'd still much rather live in the West than in North Korea, even if neither place has "humanity" in the driver's seat.
Okay, but I'm claiming that AGI will have disastrous consequences, and that the next 6 months or so are probably our only chance to stop using it (just like, as you point out, almost any other technology).
To me, it sounds a bit like those people that tell us AGW will kill us in the next 10 years, since early 1980s. Oh, interesting thought, maybe if in 6 months we'll all be doomed due to AGI, we can stop being worried about being doomed due to AGW?
I mean, I do think we can stop being worried about being doomed due to AGW. I realize there have been lots of false alarms by people that are hard to distinguish from each other in terms of credibility. From my POV, all I can do is check my own sanity, and then continue to cry wolf (legitimately, in my mind). I might be wrong and you might be right to dismiss me.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link