Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Future of Humanity Institute shuts down

futureofhumanityinstitute.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 319 posts

Re: Future of Humanity Institute shuts down

#131

Post by malfist »

BlueTemplar wrote: post #122
frozenseven wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why does he think black people have a lower IQ? Because of every study that's ever been done on this topic? Pointing this out isn't racist. >Nigerian immigrants to the US are some of the most successful immigrants. Typically those immigrants come from among the smartest few %.

This whole discussion is pointless - categorizing people by skin colour is ridiculous for almost all purposes, and also, considering history, racist. Also, didn't "black" and "n-word" switch meanings as slur/non-slur less than a century ago (and might switch them again in less than a century) ?

Are you trying to say that people didn't know the n word was offensive in....1996?

Re: Future of Humanity Institute shuts down

#132

Post by undershirt »

n4r9 wrote: post #114
busterarm wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His work is often quietly cited by a handful of moral philosophers. In particular, The Discarded Image, anytime someone is writing about medieval philosophy. Anyway, being a philosopher simply isn't what the guy did and academics are fairly dismissive without consideration anytime religion (and specifically Christian apologetics) gets in the mix.

I'd interested to take a look if you have any further info about which moral philosophers and which works cite The Discarded Image? I admit I haven't read that one myself; my own take on him as a philosopher stems from reading Mere Christianity and summaries of Surprised by Joy, and not being aware of any references to his work by more recent philosophers that I've been interested in such as Chomsky, Zizek, or Dennet…

> I got a strong feeling that Lewis' arguments and exposition were guided by something other than logic, though they pretended to be following it. The trilemma is an example of this.

One way to discover that we necessarily have worldviews outside of logic is to look at a statement like this, and realize it appeals to something outside of logic (feelings) to critique how someone else is only pretending to follow it.

Re: Future of Humanity Institute shuts down

#133

Post by VirusNewbie »

swyx wrote: post #72
dotsam wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tegmark’s institution is the Future of Life Institute, this is the Oxford Future of Humanity Institute. Tegmark’s institute is well-funded, apparently largely due to a big crypto donation from Vitalik Buterin. https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/25/a-665m-crypto-war-c...

why do people not like Max Tegmark? he was kind of a rockstar at NeurIPS

I’m a huge fan in general, but some of his arguments are sloppier than others.

Re: Future of Humanity Institute shuts down

#134

Post by exo-pla-net »

notahacker wrote: post #120
exo-pla-net wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are you saying that the author has no rational to say that? Sure, instrumental rationale: PR. And, because I believe that Bostrom says what he means, Bostrom probably does think what he said was repugnant, but probably not in a way that you would find satisfying. Bostrom probably thinks that speaking truthfully about vulnerable people, in a manner that could distress them (e.g. owing to their misunderstanding of th…

A statement that Race X is "more stupid" than Race Y is almost tautologically racist. The idea that Nick denigrating an entire race as 'stupid' is "accurate and mild", whereas any suggestion that the statement contains racism requires a "license to denigrate" is truly through the looking glass...

He's not saying the race is stupid. He is saying that it is more stupid, an operant he expounds on, revealing his underlying meaning as both accurate and mild. A factual statement is not and is never denigration.

If you and you specifically were the sole member of a race, for instance, his operant would rank your race below that of Black. This would be an observation, not a denigration.

But, if you are not Black, you are the recipient of favorable averaging. Your race would be less stupid than Black, despite you.

I hope that helps.

Re: Future of Humanity Institute shuts down

#135

Post by ceuk »

IncreasePosts wrote: post #55
exo-pla-net wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a smear taken out of context. What Bostrom actually had to say is both accurate and mild: > “I have always liked the uncompromisingly objective way of thinking and speaking: the more counterintuitive and repugnant a formulation, the more it appeals to me given that it is logically correct,” the quoted excerpt begins. “Take for example the following sentence: Blacks are more stupid than whites. I like that sen…

I wonder if these people ever paused to consider they aren't as smart as they think they are, if they're just figuring out some basics of human communication in their mid 20s that my 8 year old has known for years.

High dimensionality, more granular interpretation/models of the world. More conscious/deliberate behaviour, less benefit from neurological canalisation.

I don't think you're seeing ineptitude, I think you're seeing lucidity, sapience.

Re: Future of Humanity Institute shuts down

#136

Post by ceuk »

IncreasePosts wrote: post #101
throwaway290 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The irony is that you are looking at an example where a guy literally paused to consider how he was not so smart about communication. He also shared it with others who can also lack this skill

He said "I think it is laudable if you accustom people to the offensiveness of the truth, but be prepared that you may suffer some personal damage". Doesn't sound like someone doing introspection, it sounds more like he is lamenting that the world isn't as "logical" as he is.

> Doesn't sound like someone doing introspection, it sounds more like he is lamenting that the world isn't as "logical" as he is.

There's an autistic elephant in the room. "Why are people so irrational" could be one of the slogans if there was a high functioning autistic persons society

Re: Future of Humanity Institute shuts down

#137

Post by rurp »

arduanika wrote: post #92

Good riddance to these ideologues. It's a shame that the announcement shows no trace of remorse for the crimes they inspired (e.g. at FTX) or the lives that have been ruined by the cults to which they lent academic legitimacy. Instead, their demise is chalked up to some bland moaning about "administrative headwinds". Realistically, we're probably only looking at a brief respite before they regroup under some other be…

It's quite a leap to assume that SBF only turned to a life of crime because the EA movement lured him into it.

There are legitimate criticisms of EA and I'm not personally a follower of the movement but your post comes off as way too generally dismissive. Many of the people involved seem to have good intentions and a lot of money has been donated to objectively good causes. The longtermism stuff is more squishy, but our society is pretty bad at dealing with certain types of existential risks and we could use more people thinking about solutions rather than less.

Re: Future of Humanity Institute shuts down

#138

Post by ken47 »

colechristensen wrote: post #84
neilv wrote: post #43

The HN headline, "Future of Humanity Institute shuts down", sounds cynically funny, in context of current problems/challenges. The grandiose name Oxford chose now sounds like they've determined the situation is hopeless.

> in context of current problems/challenges People have been saying nonsense like this for as long as we have recorded history of people saying anything.

I agree with your sentiment. Every era has had its major challenges, and it's egocentric + myopic to say ours are the most important ever.

Re: Future of Humanity Institute shuts down

#139

Post by mise_en_place »

sinuhe69 wrote: post #8

What an irony! The Bostrom Institute has to close in the midst of the spectacular rise of AI, and the all-important questions of AI risks and human value alignment are more hotly debated than ever. I hope that Bostrom and his colleagues will continue and deepen their research, because humanity needs such insights now more than ever.

Is FHI even needed anymore? His ideas clearly won and took hold of a large group of people. AI doomerism is the default stance most people have on AI. e/acc makes up a tiny fraction of popular discourse today.

Re: Future of Humanity Institute shuts down

#140

Post by gwern »

Maro wrote: post #30
exo-pla-net wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a smear taken out of context. What Bostrom actually had to say is both accurate and mild: > “I have always liked the uncompromisingly objective way of thinking and speaking: the more counterintuitive and repugnant a formulation, the more it appeals to me given that it is logically correct,” the quoted excerpt begins. “Take for example the following sentence: Blacks are more stupid than whites. I like that sen…

I have no agenda for or against Nick Bostrom. It's a full paragraph quote from the Wikipedia article, with a link.

Are you trying to imply that Wikipedia articles by definition have no agenda and no one quoting a Wikipedia article can have an agenda either?
Post reply on HN