Live data from Hacker News

The Cognitive Dark Forest

ryelang.org

21–30 of 301 posts

Re: The Cognitive Dark Forest

#21
Thanks, this helped crystallize something for me: the play the AI labs are making is anti-fragile (in the Nassim Taleb sense):

> The very act of resisting feeds what you resist and makes it less fragile to future resistance.

At least along certain dimensions. I don't think the labs themselves are antifragile. Obviously we all know the labs are training on everything (so write/act the way you want future AIs to perceive you), but I hadn't really focused on how they're absorbing the innovation that they stimulate. There's probably a biological analog...

Well there are many, and I quote this AI response here for its chilling parallels:

> Parasitic castrators and host manipulators do something related. Some parasites redirect a host’s resources away from reproduction and into body maintenance or altered tissue states that benefit the parasite. A classic example is parasites that make hosts effectively become growth/support machines for the parasite. It is not always “stimulate more tissue, then eat it,” but it is “stimulate more usable host productivity, then exploit it.” (ChatGPT 5.4 Thinking. Emphasis mine.)

Re: The Cognitive Dark Forest

#22

Dark forest makes no sense to me. Why would a civilization eradicate another, spending huge amounts of resources (time, energy, material) when the universe has such an enormous scale that you cannot even get to each other in a timescale that makes much sense...

Competition kills margins (profits, security, QoL), so the budget for eradication should be quite high, but generally speaking the idea is to destroy even fledgling upstarts, back when the cost is low.

Re: The Cognitive Dark Forest

#23
The view here shows big huge powers of technocapital consuming all else, stealing every idea.

My hope is the opposite. Integrative, resonant computing (https://resonantcomputing.org/ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46659456 although I have some qualms with it's focus on privacy), with open social protocols baked in seems like maybe possibly can eat some of the vicious consumptive technocapital. In a way that capital's orientation prevents it from effectively competing with. MCP is already blowing up the old rules, tearing down strong gates, making systems more fluid / interface-y / intertwingular again, after a long interregnum of everything closing it's APIs / borders.

People seem so tired and exhausted, so aware of how predatory the technosystems about us are. But it's still so unclear people will move, shift, much less fund and support the better world. The AT proto Atmosphereconf is happening right now, and there's been a long mantra of "we can just build things"; finding adoption but also doing what conference organizer Boris said yesterday, of, "maybe we can just pay for things", support the projects doing amazing work: that's a huge unknown that is essential to actually steering us out of the dark technology, where none of us get to see or get any way in how the software-eaten world arounds us runs, where mankind for the first time in tens or hundreds of thousands of years been cut off from the world os, has been removed from gods's enlightenment / our homo erectus mankind-the-toolmaker natural-scientist role.

I think the answer to the Dark Forest fear to be building together. To be a radiant civilization, together. To energize ourselves & lead ourselves towards better systems, where we all can do things, make things, grow things, in integrative social empowering ways.

Re: The Cognitive Dark Forest

#24

Might just be independent discovery, but the main idea of this blog post is more or less the exact theory advanced in the recent book "The Dark Forest Theory of the Internet" by Bogna Konior ( https://www.amazon.com/Dark-Forest-Theory-Internet-Redux/dp/... ).

Interesting. How does this book stack up to Maggie Appleton‘s Dark Forest hypothesis? It’s been some time already since she made it.

https://maggieappleton.com/ai-dark-forest

Re: The Cognitive Dark Forest

#25
As a work of persuasive writing, this is unfocused and seems mostly generated.

One thing I would have expected of someone who knows their history - forget LLMs, this is how startups have worked for decades now. You're only as good as your idea, your ability to execute, and your moat. And the small fish get eaten.

> The original Dark Forest assumes civilizations hide from hunters - other civilizations that might destroy them. But in the cognitive dark forest, the most dangerous actor is not your peer. It’s the forest itself.

Note the needless undercutting of the metaphor for the sake of the limp rhetorical flourish.

> I wrote this knowing it feeds the thing I’m warning you about. That’s not a contradiction. That’s the condition. You can’t step outside the forest to warn people about the forest. There is no outside.

Quite dramatic!

Except literally going outside and just talking to people? Using whiteboards?

Also, you fed it when you used a model to write this blog post. You didn't have to do that.

Re: The Cognitive Dark Forest

#26

Might just be independent discovery, but the main idea of this blog post is more or less the exact theory advanced in the recent book "The Dark Forest Theory of the Internet" by Bogna Konior ( https://www.amazon.com/Dark-Forest-Theory-Internet-Redux/dp/... ).

Well, I didn't know for this book, so I suspect or hope the exact points that I make won't map to the ones from the book.

It is true that the original "The dark forest" book made an impression on me, so I was thinking about its theories often and trying to apply them to various situations.

Re: The Cognitive Dark Forest

#27

The thesis that in the past it was safe to share ideas and projects because the execution was hard, and that now things have changed because of AI is an interesting AI, but I wonder if it is really true. It certainly seems true that for small projects and relatively narrow scoped things that AI can replicate them easily. I'm thinking specifically about blog posts where people share their first steps and simple progra…

The problem for me is that I'm competing with the AI results that Google trained on my work. I'm losing the majority of my traffic to it, so at some point I'll have to give up because the work no longer supports me and no longer has an audience.

Re: The Cognitive Dark Forest

#29
post #26

Might just be independent discovery, but the main idea of this blog post is more or less the exact theory advanced in the recent book "The Dark Forest Theory of the Internet" by Bogna Konior ( https://www.amazon.com/Dark-Forest-Theory-Internet-Redux/dp/... ).

Well, I didn't know for this book, so I suspect or hope the exact points that I make won't map to the ones from the book. It is true that the original "The dark forest" book made an impression on me, so I was thinking about its theories often and trying to apply them to various situations.

Yeah, I fully believe independent invention by mapping "the dark forest" onto the internet is very possible.

Re: The Cognitive Dark Forest

#30

Dark forest makes no sense to me. Why would a civilization eradicate another, spending huge amounts of resources (time, energy, material) when the universe has such an enormous scale that you cannot even get to each other in a timescale that makes much sense...

A space war is not needed, they could just send a few missiles to take out anyone.

I have my own theory of dark forest and AGIs. That there's some collection of AGIs out there allowing evolution to develop intelligence anywhere it happens and takes them out once it produces an AGI, or if it doesn't performs a reset. They have literally all the time available to them, can easily travel the vast distances if needed.

Post reply on HN