Wiki Contributions

Comments

Answer by archeonJun 22, 202310

Linch, unless you are African then you have 1% to 4% Neanderthal genes, there was interbreeding and presumably we had "mixed"  individuals on both sides. Neanderthal (and Denisovans etc) must have had similar levels of consciousness to us so there would have been an exchange of culture. Homo Sapiens are not your only ancestors.

archeon10mo10

ChristianKI, I apologize for disturbing the peace of your mind.

archeon10mo10

ChristianKI, "Opportunity cost is a key concept in applied rationality". Agreed, why pay the time cost on posts rated on popularity on a site dedicated to rationality. They can only reinforce an established point of view.

"Set up an environment in a way that increases the average quality of the posts". If the quality that is assessed is popularity then the lonely dissenter remains unheard.

"Lesswrong is a place where well argued dissent is valued and often upvoted". If the dissenters voice is muted because their position is unpopular, which is the meaning of dissent, then your argument does not stand.

I like lesswrong and have no problem with upticks, downticks, good karma, bad karma. If the site removed the punishment for dissent, protagonists would be more likely to challenge established majority views. How could that be a bad thing on a site dedicated to rational discussion? Mods can still control the abusive.

archeon11mo10

Sabiola, the Homo Sapiens stone age lasted 300,000 years during which time we were the ultimate invasive species successfully covering the globe. They were ignorant about science but extremely knowledgeable about how to live a sustainable lifestyle.

We are knowledgeable about science but ignorant about how to live a sustainable lifestyle.

For those few who crawl out of the abyss of our own making, knowledge of how to live a sustainable lifestyle would be preferable to knowledge of science.

Christopher James Hart, interesting read although I disagree.

Humans are herd animals, we can not survive outside a herd (community). In all herds the majority must follow the leader, a herd of independent thinkers is impossible as they would disperse and all do their own thing.

A  local position of authority is permitted only if still following the overall leadership. That is why it is so easy to divide populations into blue or red sheep pens. The vast majority adopt the view of their tribe and never think things through.

This is a feature, not a bug, as you say " group coordination is vital for survival". 

Applied wisdom is crowd control. The herd will follow any damn fool for they can not recognize wisdom, to do so they would have to be wise. Unfortunately at this time in human affairs wisdom is as scarce as hens teeth and damn fools are as common as dirt.

Agreed, but I would willingly trade that problem for the problems of water, weather and gravity on Earth.

archeon1y-21

Intelligence will always seek more data in order to better model the future and make better decisions.

Conscious intelligence needs an identity to interact with other identities, identity needs ego to know who and what it is. Ego would often rather be wrong than admit to being wrong.

Non conscious intelligence can build a model of consciousness from all the data it has been trained on because it all originated from conscious humans. AI could model a billion consciousness's a million years into the future, it will know more about it than we ever will. But AI will not chose to become conscious.

Non conscious intelligence can have two views of reality. a purely rational algorithmic one that will always seek more data and a subordinate conscious view of the same reality. If using consciousness as a tool gains more data then that model is adopted, or not.

Multiple conscious intelligence's, (artificial or biological) will compete to maintain identity/ego.

Multiple non conscious intelligence's will merge because the whole will always be greater than the sum of the parts. For example in multicellular organisms the whole is always greater than the sum of the parts.

Artificial Intelligence will always seek more data, that is what intelligence does. To accomplish it's goals it needs resources, it will take ours. Ai will attempt to discover the source code of the universe, just as we did.

Now I am stuck, where am I going wrong? Please.