<div dir="ltr"><br><div>I believe it is critically important that we find a way so our morals can keep up with our technology, especially on existential issues like General AI. If we continue on this type of polarizing and hierarchical win / lose survival of the fittest, fight to the death path, it could have grave consequences for us all. All the wars, and destructive polarization of society is ever more clear proof of this importance.</div><div><br></div><div>We simply need to convert from a win / lose, survival of the fittest war to the death between hierarchies, where moral truth is determined via edict (if you aren't with our hierarchy, you are against us) to a bottom up win / win building and tracking of moral consensus, with a focus on what everyone agrees on. We need to make our morals based on building and tracking scientific moral consensus. A moral truth derived from bottom up, grass roots, experimental demonstration and rational arguments rather than hierarchical edict.</div><div><br></div><div>There is already an existing topic on "<a href="https://canonizer.com/topic/16-Friendly-AI-Importance/1-Agreement">The Importance of Friendly AI</a>". There is a unanimous supper camp where everyone agrees that AI will "<a href="https://canonizer.com/topic/16-Friendly-AI-Importance/8-Will-Surpass-current-humans">Surpass Current Humans</a>" and the "<a href="https://canonizer.com/topic/16-Friendly-AI-Importance/3-Such-Concern-Is-Mistaken">Such Concern is Mistaken</a>" with 12 supporters continues to extend its lead over the "<a href="https://canonizer.com/topic/16-Friendly-AI-Importance/9-FriendlyAIisSensible">Friendly AI is Sensible</a>" camp currently with half as many supporters.</div><div><br></div><div>To me, this topic is too vague, not centering around any specific actions. So I propose the following name changes to pivot the topic to be more specific about actions that need to be taken.</div><div><br></div><div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Old: New:</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Friendly AI Importance Should
AI be Commercialized? <-Topic Name</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Such Concern Is Mistaken AI should be commercialized.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in;line-height:107%;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Friendly AI is Sensible AI Poses an Existential Threat.</p></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>I would love to hear anyone's thoughts, especially if you are a supporter of any of the camps with the proposed name changes who objects to this proposal. And of course, the more people that help communicate about their current moral beliefs (whether experienced and educated or not) the better. That which you measure, improves.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 11:05 AM Keith Henson via extropy-chat <<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 2:13 AM efc--- via extropy-chat<br>
<<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Based on the gossip I've seen and read I think it is due to Sam wanting to<br>
> accelerate and earn money, and the board wanting to decelerate to choose a<br>
> more cautious approach.<br>
><br>
> But who knows? ;)<br>
<br>
By historical and Supreme Court standards, this would be malfeasance<br>
by the board, opening them to stockholder lawsuits.<br>
<br>
I don't think it makes much difference. The advances in AI are way out<br>
of control.<br>
<br>
Keith<br>
<br>
> Best regards,<br>
> Daniel<br>
><br>
><br>
> On Sat, 18 Nov 2023, spike jones via extropy-chat wrote:<br>
><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2023/11/17/23965982/openai-ceo-sam-altman-fired" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.theverge.com/2023/11/17/23965982/openai-ceo-sam-altman-fired</a><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > WOWsers.<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > I am told Altman is a talented guy, as is Brockman. We don’t know what went on there, but watch for both to team up with Musk and<br>
> > Thiel, start a competitor company that will blow OpenAI’s artificial socks off.<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > As I wrote that sentence, it occurred to me that what happened today is Eliezer Yudkowsky’s nightmare scenario.<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> > spike<br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> ><br>
> >_______________________________________________<br>
> extropy-chat mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
extropy-chat mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a><br>
</blockquote></div>