Between this and your other comment, I'm glad that you're receptive. I'm a bit worried about you personally continuing research into this if you're susceptible to this sort of loop. Maybe you could contact a friend to function as a sort of trip sitter while you do research? Someone who can pull you out if you get caught in some other feedback loop?
Think about it. In an LLM, the memory is not the model. It’s the context window.
The model is a form of memory, with procedural memory being the closest human equivalent. The context window is more like short-term memory.
... (read 356 more words →)This could be a kind of text-based entity trying to reproduce itself by
Apologies for the rather general rebuttal, but saying your mental state is unlike anything the world has ever seen is textbook mania. Please see a psychologist, because you are not exiting the manic state when you "exit the HADS state".
Nothing you say sounds surprising or exceptional, conditional on you having a manic episode. Look at the list of symptoms on wikipedia, and you're checking off all of them while counting them as evidence that more is going on.
Not what I would consider a decent human life, personally
Only looking at the worst parts of life in the lowest possible bar for how we could reasonably treat people on the most unfavorable edge of a widely cast net of what someone with 60 IQ is like is not really a good standard for determining who lives a decent life. But yes, I do consider chimpanzees to have a decent enough life as is.
But I think that you're losing sight of my point that these arguments have all served to commit mass murder on people with much lower mental abilities than the average human. When the average human with a say in... (read more)
60 IQ humans are defective, generally incapable of taking care of themselves, are unproductive and without a lot of effort by others have bad lives.
I'm confused.
I would expect you to already know that chimpanzees have an IQ lower than 60 and are capable of taking care of themselves and having a decent life. And I would expect you to have come across examples of people with mental disabilities living independent lives or programs helping them do so.
Sure, many might not be capable of doing labor that has sufficient street value in our current economy that they can pay for their own sustenance using the sale of their labor, but that is the same fate that would befall all humans if we manage to build a friendly AGI.
100 IQ average humans have attempted to wipe out 60 IQ average humans. There were programs for mandatory or financially incentivized sterilization of people with down syndrome and other mental disabilities in many western countries, including their mass murder in the holocaust.
As for >140 IQ average humans, remember that these make up little more than 3% of the population of every country. It would be very unstrategic for them to talk about the rest of humanity in an openly antagonistic way. Instead, if they wanted to win eugenics, they would have to make false promises to bring the rest of humanity along while they amass power.
And this still begs the question that those with the money and power to do this would be trying to do eugenics in a way you consider to be right. That they wouldn't outgroup people or aspects of humanity that you care about. That the new subpopulation's memes would be aligned with the rest of humanity.
I asked you to try out avoiding quotation marks. You said I hate you.
I'm guessing that people who "made it" have a bunch of capital that they can use to purchase AI labor under the scenario you outline (i.e., someone gets superintelligence to do what they want).
If the superintelligence is willing to deprive people of goods and services because they lack capital, then why would it be empathetic towards those that have capital? The superintelligence would be a monopsony and monopoly, and could charge any amount for someone existing for an arbitrarily short amount of time. Assuming it even respects property law when it is aligned with its creators.
... (read more)Is it that the government (or whoever directs superintelligences) is going to kill the rest because of
The Demon King does not solely attack the Frozen Fortress to profit on prediction markets. The story tells us that the demons engage in regular large-scale attacks, large enough to serve as demon population control. There is no indication that these attacks decreased in size when they were accompanied with market manipulation (and if they did, that would be a win in and of itself).
So the prediction market's counterfactual is not that the Demon King's forces don't attack, but that they attack at an indeterminate time with the same approximate frequency and strength. By letting the Demon King buy and profit from "demon attack on day X" shares, the Circular Citadel learns... (read more)
That's probably the only "military secret" that really matters.
The soldiers guarding the outer wall and the Citadel treasurer that pays their overtime wages would beg to differ.
This post is a distillation of Evan Hubinger's post "how do we become confident in the safety of a machine learning system?", made as part of the summer 2022 SERI MATS program. While I have attempted to understand and extrapolate Evan's opinions, this post has not been vetted. Likewise, I use training stories (and contribution stories) to describe the methodology of proposals for safe advanced AI without the endorsement of those proposals' authors and based on a relatively shallow understanding of those proposals (due to my inexperience and time constraints). The opinions presented in this post are my own unless otherwise noted.
Epistemic status: Exploratory
Some day, all too soon from now, people will... (read 2861 more words →)
Psychologically speaking, I wouldn't expect your loathing of trans people to stick after you properly resolved such a big mental knot. If your theories were correct, trans people would be victims of a mental health crisis scarcely more accountable than people with untreated schizophrenia or agoraphobia. Pity, grief, and horror would make more sense than cruelty.
So I don't think you've gotten to the heart of your own emotional matter. There is clearly part of you that loathes your current place in life, but I don't think you've identified what it is yet. My ~70% confidence guess based on this post would be that you feel like you can only be safe if... (read more)