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

Accelerationism: how a fringe philosophy predicted the future we live in

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 63 posts

Re: Accelerationism: how a fringe philosophy predicted the future we live in

#41

Post by MrQuincle »

atemerev wrote: post #36

Is there anybody here who _doesn't_ like technical progress and doesn't want it to go faster? We are still stuck on this little blue marble, with the entire Universe in our telescopes (hundreds of billions of galaxies, hundreds of billions stars in each), that we can see, but can't really visit. It almost maddens me. If we meatbags are too fragile to travel to stars, let's build immortal AIs who'll do it for us. I am…

I feel more and more as if people are optimizing for number of experiences per minute.

I don't know what the utility function of the universe can be, but I would hope for something deep rather than fast.

Reflection.

Re: Accelerationism: how a fringe philosophy predicted the future we live in

#42

Post by jessewmc »

atemerev wrote: post #36

Is there anybody here who _doesn't_ like technical progress and doesn't want it to go faster? We are still stuck on this little blue marble, with the entire Universe in our telescopes (hundreds of billions of galaxies, hundreds of billions stars in each), that we can see, but can't really visit. It almost maddens me. If we meatbags are too fragile to travel to stars, let's build immortal AIs who'll do it for us. I am…

I think that in any comprehensible time scale, accelerationism is an inevitable outcome rather than a desirable outcome.

I can see a conscious set of lifeforms that would prefer to burn slowly and enjoy existence in a relatively sustainable manner.

It does however seem inevitable that life will -- if it does not fail completely -- spill out of our planet into the universe as you say in the form of machines or 'AI', rather than meatbags. Life is a game with winners and losers and winning is selecting for superior reproduction, technology, and colonisation.

Re: Accelerationism: how a fringe philosophy predicted the future we live in

#43

Post by Apocryphon »

Another excellent piece on the ideology for the layman:

"The Darkness Before the Right" https://theawl.com/the-darkness-before-the-right-84e97225ac1...

the same author's clarifying follow-up is good too, though with a lot more academic jargon: https://pmacdougald.wordpress.com/2016/04/14/accelerationism...

Re: Accelerationism: how a fringe philosophy predicted the future we live in

#44

Post by atemerev »

ABCLAW wrote: post #39
atemerev wrote: post #36

Is there anybody here who _doesn't_ like technical progress and doesn't want it to go faster? We are still stuck on this little blue marble, with the entire Universe in our telescopes (hundreds of billions of galaxies, hundreds of billions stars in each), that we can see, but can't really visit. It almost maddens me. If we meatbags are too fragile to travel to stars, let's build immortal AIs who'll do it for us. I am…

>Is there anybody here is who _doesn't_ like technical progress and doesn't want it to go faster? Sure. I am quite glad we stopped iterating on nuclear weapon designs and I am quite fine with the state of the art not obliterating entire continents yet. I'm also quite happy we haven't done the R&D and optimization to lower the cost for mass producing neutron bombs too. I think you are too. I like technical progress th…

> we stopped iterating on nuclear weapon designs

We didn't. Los Alamos is pretty busy this time of year. So is Sarov.

> we haven't done the R&D and optimization to lower the cost for mass producing neutron bombs too.

We had. And also, we were smart enough to put these papers on the shelf and not proceed with them.

Say what you want about humanity, but 70+ years without a nuclear war is impressive, given our history. It became possible through continuous innovation in game theory, spy games, and yes, improving the deterrents. I think nuclear weapons will never be actually used in large-scale future wars, like chemical weapons weren't massively used in WW2.

Progress is good. Wars are part of the progress. Wars themselves are bad, though, so some of the progress is spent to keep wars at bay, to not interfere with the progress.

Re: Accelerationism: how a fringe philosophy predicted the future we live in

#45

Post by bykovich2 »

atemerev wrote: post #36

Is there anybody here who _doesn't_ like technical progress and doesn't want it to go faster? We are still stuck on this little blue marble, with the entire Universe in our telescopes (hundreds of billions of galaxies, hundreds of billions stars in each), that we can see, but can't really visit. It almost maddens me. If we meatbags are too fragile to travel to stars, let's build immortal AIs who'll do it for us. I am…

I personally don't care about any of that. I'm not sure what I'd need to "escape" from. There's infinitely more than enough on Earth -- even a minute slice of Earth -- for one human qua human.

Even the exploratory impulse you seem to be experiencing seems misaligned with your conclusion. There are places, people, cities, societies, continents, ocean floors, mountain peaks, unplumbed caves, blistered deserts, dark forests, that you haven't seen here -- what's so hot about Alpha Centauri?

Re: Accelerationism: how a fringe philosophy predicted the future we live in

#46

Post by bykovich2 »

MrQuincle wrote: post #41
atemerev wrote: post #36

Is there anybody here who _doesn't_ like technical progress and doesn't want it to go faster? We are still stuck on this little blue marble, with the entire Universe in our telescopes (hundreds of billions of galaxies, hundreds of billions stars in each), that we can see, but can't really visit. It almost maddens me. If we meatbags are too fragile to travel to stars, let's build immortal AIs who'll do it for us. I am…

I feel more and more as if people are optimizing for number of experiences per minute. I don't know what the utility function of the universe can be, but I would hope for something deep rather than fast. Reflection.

What do you mean by "the utility function of the universe"?

Re: Accelerationism: how a fringe philosophy predicted the future we live in

#47

Post by bykovich2 »

atemerev wrote: post #44
ABCLAW wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Is there anybody here is who _doesn't_ like technical progress and doesn't want it to go faster? Sure. I am quite glad we stopped iterating on nuclear weapon designs and I am quite fine with the state of the art not obliterating entire continents yet. I'm also quite happy we haven't done the R&D and optimization to lower the cost for mass producing neutron bombs too. I think you are too. I like technical progress th…

> we stopped iterating on nuclear weapon designs We didn't. Los Alamos is pretty busy this time of year. So is Sarov. > we haven't done the R&D and optimization to lower the cost for mass producing neutron bombs too. We had. And also, we were smart enough to put these papers on the shelf and not proceed with them. Say what you want about humanity, but 70+ years without a nuclear war is impressive, given our history.…

"Progress is good" is an implicative tautology -- the seeming obviousness of the statement relies on the fact that the term "progress" strongly implies "betterness." And it is, in fact, its applicability to any state of affairs a matter of betterness -- but betterness of very specific, and often unspoken, types. "Technology progress" may mean "better technology" -- but it does /not/ necessarily mean "technology that is better for people."

Re: Accelerationism: how a fringe philosophy predicted the future we live in

#48

Post by fhood »

goatlover wrote: post #26
mannigfaltig wrote: post #12

There is always a fringe philosophy that had it right.

Are they right in this case? I see the previous 70 years (1877-1947) as having more fundamental change than the last 70. It's hard to top electricity, automobiles, aircraft, penicillin, vaccinations, refrigeration, radio, tv, QM & Relativity as fundamentally transformative. Also, two world wars transforming the political map and doing away with the dynastic empires of the past. If you define the singularity as being…

More specifically, progress in physics has slowed dramatically.

Re: Accelerationism: how a fringe philosophy predicted the future we live in

#49

Post by atemerev »

bykovich2 wrote: post #47
atemerev wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we stopped iterating on nuclear weapon designs We didn't. Los Alamos is pretty busy this time of year. So is Sarov. > we haven't done the R&D and optimization to lower the cost for mass producing neutron bombs too. We had. And also, we were smart enough to put these papers on the shelf and not proceed with them. Say what you want about humanity, but 70+ years without a nuclear war is impressive, given our history.…

"Progress is good" is an implicative tautology -- the seeming obviousness of the statement relies on the fact that the term "progress" strongly implies "betterness." And it is, in fact, its applicability to any state of affairs a matter of betterness -- but betterness of very specific, and often unspoken, types. "Technology progress" may mean "better technology" -- but it does /not/ necessarily mean "technology that…

Yes, not necessarily. Progress, in my opinion, is increasing efficiency in the modes of operation. Scaling-out. Space programs are progress. Modern warfare is not progress, it is, at best, self-defence and status quo preservation.

I believe that intelligence rooted in biology is not the most efficient mode of operation.

Re: Accelerationism: how a fringe philosophy predicted the future we live in

#50

Post by MrQuincle »

bykovich2 wrote: post #46
MrQuincle wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel more and more as if people are optimizing for number of experiences per minute. I don't know what the utility function of the universe can be, but I would hope for something deep rather than fast. Reflection.

What do you mean by "the utility function of the universe"?

With that I mean a function that can be optimized. If acceleration is about the unrelentless strive to higher forms of intelligence, technology, or general progress, it can be seen as some form of compression.

Or less general. A smarter AI is able to compress more facts or thruths about the world than a dumber AI does. A smarter universe henceforth is able to compress more facts or truths about itself than a dumber universe.

Post reply on HN