Sometimes, maybe you don't have time for friends to let you know. You're living an hour away from a wildfire that's spreading fast. And the difference between escaping alive and asphyxiating is having trained to notice and act on the small note of discord as the thoughts flicker by:
"Huh, weird."
Our civilization lives an hour away from a dozen metaphorical fires, some of which no living person has seriously thought about
We have a lot of people showing up, saying "I want to help." And the problem is, the thing we most need help with is figuring out what to do. We need people with breadth and depth of understanding, who can look at the big picture and figure out what needs doing
Figure out how best to spread rationality, or at least ideas about X-risks. This is quite possible with our resources equal to zero, but if we can spread these ideas to, for example, 20% of the population, it will greatly help us with the fight against X-risks. In addition, we will have more people who will help us... to think about what we should to do, lol
1) "I think we call this "taxes"."
So I invented taxes for charitable donations.
2) The second option is better for most participants, but not for everyone, you are right
It's a nice sequence and I like it, but normal peoples call that "liberty", don't "slack", lol
This is a very useful article that helped me understand many things about myself and society. Thanks!
This is a very useful article that helped me understand many things about myself and society. Thanks!
Okay I'll rewrite the post. Thanks for your answers
That's true, but Program B will still be worse than a human-written program, so we aim to avoid spaghetti towers.
Spaghetti towers work especially poorly in changing environments: if evolution were reasonable, it would force us to try to maximize the number of our genes in the next generation. But instead, she created several heuristics like hunger and desire for groin friction. So when people came up with civilization, we started eating fast food and having sex with condoms.
People with the simulacra level 4th can praise their political allies.
I think there's a different mechanism here. I don't like it if Mr. A can't do X, but doesn't know about it, publicly announces that he's going to do X, and gets a lot of prestige upfront. At the same time, I understand that he will not succeed, and he should not get prestige. And after that, A fails, and it makes me feel worse about those who claim that they can do X if they have no experience.
Imagine that some philosopher announces that he is going to create an aligned AGI in a month, after which everyone begins to admire him. That's exactly the feeling.
In other words, the problem is not that Mr. A doesn't have enough prestige, but that he doesn't have enough chances to succeed.
... but even if Mr. A decides to create an agreed AGI in a month without announcing it publicly, then you will wisely say, "This is impossible. Once I also thought that I could do it in a month, but it's not like that.". Wait - this is the reaction "juggling 3 balls is impossible"!
What did I understand: most of the exclamations "you don't have enough experience / look at yourself from the outside / it's not possible" from experts in this domainare true. I mean, if you decide to do X, but all the experts in the domain say that you will not succeed, this is quite strong Bayesian evidence in favor of the fact that you will not succeed. You can't dismiss it by deciding that they're just afraid to share their status.
But otherwise I agree with Eliezer.