I'll just say that "intelligence.org" is as heavy-handed as Google buying the .dev TLD.
The name of the organization is the Machine Intelligence Research Institute.
Rationality: From AI to Zombies
11–20 of 142 posts
Re: Rationality: From AI to Zombies
#12There is an ebook here (http://lesswrong.com/lw/72m/an_epub_of_eliezers_blog_posts/) where you can read it unedited as it was originally written. I don't know if anyone would want to do this, but it's how I read them. I imagine a lot of the content would be edited down or out, especially the standalone stuff. That's not necessarily a bad thing though.
Re: Rationality: From AI to Zombies
#13I am currently reading, and loving, Yudkowsky's introduction to Quantum Mechanics from the blog: http://lesswrong.com/lw/pc/quantum_explanations/ Does anyone know whether that sequence has made it to one of these books?
I quite liked his introduction! Be aware, however, that he dramatically overstates some things. For example, he claims that the many-worlds interpretation is obviously correct. This is basically wrong: it may be correct, but it certainly isn't obviously correct, and many scientists whose entire research is dedicated to quantum mechanics would disagree that many-worlds is correct at all. There is a long list of altern…
If you read his apologetics, it's literally faith-based science.
Re: Rationality: From AI to Zombies
#14Careful. Yudkowski and LW have a dark side. (google Roko's Basilisk)
Rationality applied to ethics is a sticky wicket. You have to subscribe to some metric of "good" in order to weigh and compare outcomes. EY's definition of good is ruthlessly utilitarian, and that has some extreme, nay dire consequences for certain thought experiments.
Consume this philosophy at your own risk.
Re: Rationality: From AI to Zombies
#15Careful. Yudkowski and LW have a dark side. (google Roko's Basilisk) Rationality applied to ethics is a sticky wicket. You have to subscribe to some metric of "good" in order to weigh and compare outcomes. EY's definition of good is ruthlessly utilitarian, and that has some extreme, nay dire consequences for certain thought experiments. Consume this philosophy at your own risk.
Are you attempting reverse psychology?
Re: Rationality: From AI to Zombies
#16Careful. Yudkowski and LW have a dark side. (google Roko's Basilisk) Rationality applied to ethics is a sticky wicket. You have to subscribe to some metric of "good" in order to weigh and compare outcomes. EY's definition of good is ruthlessly utilitarian, and that has some extreme, nay dire consequences for certain thought experiments. Consume this philosophy at your own risk.
Are you attempting reverse psychology?
I'm pretty sure it's a typo, but it's fun thinking about what reverse physiology would even be.
Re: Rationality: From AI to Zombies
#17Careful. Yudkowski and LW have a dark side. (google Roko's Basilisk) Rationality applied to ethics is a sticky wicket. You have to subscribe to some metric of "good" in order to weigh and compare outcomes. EY's definition of good is ruthlessly utilitarian, and that has some extreme, nay dire consequences for certain thought experiments. Consume this philosophy at your own risk.
The Roko's Basilisk thing is way overblown. The author addressed the issue here: https://www.reddit.com/r/xkcd/comments/2myg86/xkcd_1450_aibo...
And of course some of the topics he writes about are always going to be controversial. But utilitarianism is hardly radical.
Re: Rationality: From AI to Zombies
#18Careful. Yudkowski and LW have a dark side. (google Roko's Basilisk) Rationality applied to ethics is a sticky wicket. You have to subscribe to some metric of "good" in order to weigh and compare outcomes. EY's definition of good is ruthlessly utilitarian, and that has some extreme, nay dire consequences for certain thought experiments. Consume this philosophy at your own risk.
The lesson I learned from Roko's Basilisk event that I think Eliezer and most of the LW community also endorses is that if you're not careful, applying some models too far can have those "extreme, nay dire consequences for certain thought experiments" - so it's best not to commit too far to those methods, because they may have some caveats, or you might just have applied them wrong.
Re: Rationality: From AI to Zombies
#19Careful. Yudkowski and LW have a dark side. (google Roko's Basilisk) Rationality applied to ethics is a sticky wicket. You have to subscribe to some metric of "good" in order to weigh and compare outcomes. EY's definition of good is ruthlessly utilitarian, and that has some extreme, nay dire consequences for certain thought experiments. Consume this philosophy at your own risk.
Yudkowsky's "good", at that of his fans, also tends to be naively utilitarian, ignoring modern development of that philosophy (see his whole "it's better for one person to be tortured for 50 years than for a very large number of people to each get one speck of dust in their eye" thing, for example).