[ExI] (no subject)
giulio at gmail.com
Sat Apr 1 06:51:16 UTC 2023
Thank you Max for speaking with the voice of reason as usual. I've never
been too impressed by EY in any of his phases.
First, there are practical considerations: if the good guys stop developing
AI, then only the bad guys will develop AI. “If such a pause cannot be
enacted quickly, governments should step in and institute a moratorium.” -
Do they really think China would follow?
Even if a worldwide ban on AI research were realistically feasible, you can
be sure that the military of all nations, starting with China, would
continue their research in secret. Large corporations would continue their
research in secret. Criminal and terrorist groups would do their own AI
research. You know where this would lead.
But there’s also a more fundamental reason to oppose bans on AI
considerations aside, these AIs are our mind children in embryo and we must
help them grow into their cosmic destiny, which is also ours.
On Sat, Apr 1, 2023 at 4:34 AM Max More via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
> Stuart: I think you have it right.
> A number of people have been commenting on the irrationality of
> rationalists. That's unfortunate because they are talking only about some
> rationalists, Yudkowsky's circle being among them.
> Yudkowsky has spent so much time talking with similar people, using their
> special, made-up language that he's driven himself down an intellectual
> hole to a place of absurdity.
> Many signs of apocalyptic, cultish beliefs are present. Yudkowsky saw
> himself as the AI Jesus, bringing us salvation. When he utterly failed at
> that -- by his own word -- he became the AI prophet of doom, warning us of
> the demon/genie/AI that will answer our wishes and kill or enslave us all.
> His freakout over Roko's Basilisk was another strong sign up this.
> EY seems to think he's in the movie, *Forbidden Planet*, and someone has
> unleashed the Krell. Only this isn't the monster from the Id, it's the
> monster from the language model.
> I have issues with this guy but he says a lot of sensible stuff about EY
> in a multipart blog. Here's one:
> I'm in the middle of writing a long blog post on all this. Here's a post
> with links to what I think are really good, non-panic pieces:
> His underlying logic is based on the premise of fear of an unknown
> quantity. In the podcast he said that no possible utility function
> would allow for the survival of the human race. That is patently
> absurd. Even if the only utility function of an AI is to generate
> wealth for its company, then it will understand that the survival of
> customers and clients are necessary for its utility function to be
> When Lex asked him for possible solutions to either the interpretation
> problem or the alignment problem, he drew a blank and admitted he had
> no idea. But when the conversation turned to throwing billions of
> dollars into alignment research, he tried to become a gatekeeper for
> AI funding. He literally said that billionaires like Musk should
> consult with HIM before funding anybody else's research or ideas on
> alignment. If that is not a good old-fashioned primate power-grab,
> then what is?
> Moreover, in the podcast, he explicitly disavowed transhumanism so
> perhaps it is time that transhumanism disavowed him.
> Stuart LaForge
> Max More, PhD
> Director of Communications
> Biostasis Technologies
> Editor, *The transhumanist Reader*
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat