Live data from Hacker News

Clarity didn't work, trying mysterianism (2012)

gwern.net

41–50 of 63 posts

Re: Clarity didn't work, trying mysterianism (2012)

#41
post #2

One of the more compelling (and scary) stories about how AI takes over the world. If you liked this, also check our Pluribus.

And there are people who argue in favor of the joined, because it's depicted as an entirely blissful state with no conflict (aside from the few remaining unjoined in the show). Despite the major downsides the first season has already shown.

Re: Clarity didn't work, trying mysterianism (2012)

#42

I don't get it. First, how is it "better for you" to take the earring off, if "the wearer lives an abnormally successful life, usually ending out as a rich and much-beloved pillar of the community with a large and happy family?" Second, apparently some people do choose to take the earring off at some point, because the story refers to "the testimony of all living wearers." So it does not, in fact, appear to usurp, su…

The problem is not that it limits the wearer's free will. On the contrary, it allows the wearer to exercise it way too effectively on the premise that the wearer already knows exactly who he is and what he needs.

Re: Clarity didn't work, trying mysterianism (2012)

#43

I don't get it. First, how is it "better for you" to take the earring off, if "the wearer lives an abnormally successful life, usually ending out as a rich and much-beloved pillar of the community with a large and happy family?" Second, apparently some people do choose to take the earring off at some point, because the story refers to "the testimony of all living wearers." So it does not, in fact, appear to usurp, su…

> how is it "better for you" to take the earring off, if "the wearer lives an abnormally successful life, usually ending out as a rich and much-beloved pillar of the community with a large and happy family?"

I think it's pretty obvious since you read until the end you know in the second one there's quickly no "you" remaining ;)

It's like the terrifying answer to Star Trek teleporter paradox. On the surface it's the same guy. He walks like Bob and talks like Bob and is more successful thanks to the power of instant travel! But YOU are dead after the first teleportation.

Re: Clarity didn't work, trying mysterianism (2012)

#44
A philosopher or meditator should chime in here. Spending a modicum of time in meditation shows you that intentions just show up from nowhere, they're not "you". We might as well call the earring "your prefrontal cortex" (or whatever), and this would describe the current state of things.

Re: Clarity didn't work, trying mysterianism (2012)

#45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, so there is a magical device that provides you with deep contentment no matter what. But then, when you die and they cut your head open, the physical, biological brain has shrunk. And that's bad. Is that right? Is this what it's about? Is the story actually arguing something? I have just been literally asking what it even presumes itself to be about. Is it the gloss above? If it's about agency, I don't get it. It…

Is it actually contentment or are you fading away so much you cease to exist? The story is not about physical brain changes, no. It's about losing yourself. It's arguing that to exist is to make decisions. Following the device too much leads to a life that looks successful from the outside but inside no longer has a person enjoying the success, just a puppet.

But it explicitly says it provides the wearer with happiness, it is "supernaturally effective" at it. Where as a reader are we supposed to gather this is not an internal happiness?

Come to think of it, its not even clear there is a question of agency or like some inverted solipsism as you suggest. Wouldn't the wearer need to be compelled for that to be at stake? Kadmi-nomai can wear it and take it off, right?

Aren't they, from the inside and outside, just listening to magically good advice and getting along great because of it?

Re: Clarity didn't work, trying mysterianism (2012)

#46

I don't get it. First, how is it "better for you" to take the earring off, if "the wearer lives an abnormally successful life, usually ending out as a rich and much-beloved pillar of the community with a large and happy family?" Second, apparently some people do choose to take the earring off at some point, because the story refers to "the testimony of all living wearers." So it does not, in fact, appear to usurp, su…

It stands to reason that the people who took the earring off were less happy and made worse decisions than the people who kept it on for the rest of their lives. So then ask yourself: why did they take it off? Pondering the implications of that question is the entire point of this short story.

> It stands to reason that the people who took the earring off were less happy and made worse decisions than the people who kept it on for the rest of their lives.

No. It always tells you what will make you happiest. "Better for you if you take me off."

Re: Clarity didn't work, trying mysterianism (2012)

#47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like a fairly direct parable against AI, suggesting that even if it's right it's better to think for yourself.

Eh I think the writer should visit poor countries and live among locals. Mistakes and poor judgements compound, and it leads to horrific living conditions (malnutrition, nonexistent hygiene, quack medicines, short-sighted violence, etc) In fact developed countries are built on top of these "earrings": it's called math (and by extension science in general). If the math is right, it's always right, and it has spared th…

Scott Alexander has actually practiced medicine in Haiti as part of a relief effort.

Re: Clarity didn't work, trying mysterianism (2012)

#48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh I think the writer should visit poor countries and live among locals. Mistakes and poor judgements compound, and it leads to horrific living conditions (malnutrition, nonexistent hygiene, quack medicines, short-sighted violence, etc) In fact developed countries are built on top of these "earrings": it's called math (and by extension science in general). If the math is right, it's always right, and it has spared th…

Scott Alexander has actually practiced medicine in Haiti as part of a relief effort.

He was in Haiti for one week.

https://web.archive.org/web/20150407223525/http://squid314.l...

Then went back to a society safeguarded by the "earrings" (OSHA, FDA, CDC, etc). Poor countries usually don't have the resources and enough HDI to enforce public safety.

Not saying his experience doesnt count, but 1 week is not enough to experience that crushing learned helplessness when everyone around you keep doing stupid sh*t and sabotaging themselves and others near them.

Which is why Trump defunding public safety agencies is baffling to me, a person from a poor country. Such a decadent behavior.

Re: Clarity didn't work, trying mysterianism (2012)

#49

I don't get it. First, how is it "better for you" to take the earring off, if "the wearer lives an abnormally successful life, usually ending out as a rich and much-beloved pillar of the community with a large and happy family?" Second, apparently some people do choose to take the earring off at some point, because the story refers to "the testimony of all living wearers." So it does not, in fact, appear to usurp, su…

> Second, apparently some people do choose to take the earring off at some point, because the story refers to "the testimony of all living wearers."

You are hilariously misreading that :-)

"First, he confirmed from the records and the testimony of all living wearers"

Who says that they testified after taking the earring off? My reading (done with my non-atrophied brain, used to reading human prose not LLM-prose) was clear on the very first go: Those who testified did so while wearing the earring, then they died but their testimony was already recorded.

> Not seeing the problem here.

As you've made clear in many many of your posts on HN, you are all-in on LLMs and appear to use them much more than even the average HN user. Maybe start considering that you are losing comprehension with regard to human-written prose?

Re: Clarity didn't work, trying mysterianism (2012)

#50
At first glance it can work only by completely disabling the meaning-seeker part of the wearer's personality. Ennui and existential/absurd feelings can't be resolved by indulgence.

Would it make Sisyphus happy without bypassing the implied will of gods that he shall be forever fully conscious in order to suffer? Someone pls give the earring to poor dude.

Post reply on HN