[flagged]
The rational conclusion of doomerism is violence
41–50 of 203 posts
Re: The rational conclusion of doomerism is violence
#42I don't agree with Yudkowsky, but I think there's certainly a chance that he's right about AI destroying humanity. I just don't think the likelihood of that happening is as high as he thinks it is. But there certainly is a chance. The problem with trying to stop it is, how? Even if you killed every single AI company leader and every single top AI engineer, it would almost certainly just slow down the rate of progress…
[flagged]
Re: The rational conclusion of doomerism is violence
#43War is a mere continuation of policy by other means[1]. When policy through legislation is empirically impotent[2], calls to continue attempts at a failed strategy are indistinguishable from being told, "continue losing." There is a real, undeniable, build up of political tension. When it fails to be released in the legislative arena, it doesn't dissapate. When we point out that, "the quality of life right now is the…
> "fix participatory democracy"
Ah yes, a popular codeword for "I did not get my way".
There is no electoral majority behind the AI doomer cult. It is not a failure of "democracy" that they haven't gotten what they want. It is a failure of their activism, or just the general unpalatability of their wild ideas, or both. They don't get to throw Molotovs just because they lose.
Re: The rational conclusion of doomerism is violence
#44It is completely coherent to both think that an extremely bad thing is coming, and yet that does not justify any particular action. "The ends don't justify the means" and literal entire religions have been built on this concept. It is not irrational or incoherent to believe that even something as serious as extinction does not justify arbitrary action. Someone _may_ decide that it does, but it is not a necessary conc…
> "The ends don't justify the means" Eh. The ends do justify the means, but only inasmuch as those means actually do help to achieve the ends — astonishingly often, they don't (and rarer, but also often, actually bring you in the opposite direction from those end goals), and so remain unjustified.
Thanks.
That sentence is constantly repeated, as if it would be some kind of absolute truth. The fact is, for every end, there will be probably some means that are totally justified, and some that not.
I think the original context is: no matter how high, pure and perfect the end is, it does not meany any mean is justified.
Re: The rational conclusion of doomerism is violence
#45People are basing their entire world view on not understanding the nature of exponential phenomena. Exponential phenomena only begin in a medium that holds the potential for that phenomena, and necessarily consume that medium. That is, exponential phenomena are inherently self-limiting. The bateria reaches the edge of the petri dish. When the all the nitroglycerin is broken up the dynamite is done exploding. That doe…
Agreed. But, many said the same thing about Moore's Law or its equivalents in 1985, 1995, 2005, 2015, and yet the pace of core hardware development has been relentlessly exponential. I keep thinking we must be approaching some kind of limit (and surely we must be!) but I've learned not to bet on it.
Re: The rational conclusion of doomerism is violence
#46War is a mere continuation of policy by other means[1]. When policy through legislation is empirically impotent[2], calls to continue attempts at a failed strategy are indistinguishable from being told, "continue losing." There is a real, undeniable, build up of political tension. When it fails to be released in the legislative arena, it doesn't dissapate. When we point out that, "the quality of life right now is the…
> "fix participatory democracy" Ah yes, a popular codeword for "I did not get my way". There is no electoral majority behind the AI doomer cult. It is not a failure of "democracy" that they haven't gotten what they want. It is a failure of their activism, or just the general unpalatability of their wild ideas, or both. They don't get to throw Molotovs just because they lose.
Maybe democracy is fundamentally flawed because the demos is? How should one act in such a situation?
Re: The rational conclusion of doomerism is violence
#47Yes, but against the angry dormers we have hordes of cheerful coomers who welcome the fruits of the labour of the AI with one open arm.
Re: The rational conclusion of doomerism is violence
#48War is a mere continuation of policy by other means[1]. When policy through legislation is empirically impotent[2], calls to continue attempts at a failed strategy are indistinguishable from being told, "continue losing." There is a real, undeniable, build up of political tension. When it fails to be released in the legislative arena, it doesn't dissapate. When we point out that, "the quality of life right now is the…
> "fix participatory democracy" Ah yes, a popular codeword for "I did not get my way". There is no electoral majority behind the AI doomer cult. It is not a failure of "democracy" that they haven't gotten what they want. It is a failure of their activism, or just the general unpalatability of their wild ideas, or both. They don't get to throw Molotovs just because they lose.
Ah yes, "continue losing."
Go ahead and read Gilens and Page and tell me participatory democracy is working. Until then, expect more of the same impotent condemnations and a refusal to understand the social mechanics producing acts of violence.
Re: The rational conclusion of doomerism is violence
#49War is a mere continuation of policy by other means[1]. When policy through legislation is empirically impotent[2], calls to continue attempts at a failed strategy are indistinguishable from being told, "continue losing." There is a real, undeniable, build up of political tension. When it fails to be released in the legislative arena, it doesn't dissapate. When we point out that, "the quality of life right now is the…
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."
Wealth inequality isn't just about economic wellbeing but political power. Separately, the US legislature is almost entirely crippled, only able to pass one major bill per presidential term, while the dominant political party celebrated this and cedes all power to an executive whose intention is to tear apart the administrative state and bring about techno feudalism.
I once again note that none of the AI leadership has even tried to address government policies to guarantee a baseline of economic wellbeing for our citizens, while they acknowledge AI will likely have massive, disruptive impacts on society and economy. Anthropic is the only one that has shown any public concern for the dangers of AI by insisting on some moral baseline of AI use in the Defense department.
Re: The rational conclusion of doomerism is violence
#50Mentally ill people often have a justification for their actions which is vaguely rational, but you'll notice the vast majority of people aren't doing what they're doing.
These people just get attracted to political causes somehow. Even the woman's suffrage movement had some people setting buildings on fire.