Your proof of Bayes' Theorem assumes P(A and B)=P(A)⋅P(B∣A), but it's not clear why someone who doubts Bayes would accept that.
Can you explain why you think that?
I'm with Anthropic on this, most people are less virtuous than Claude, so Claude obeying them to do non-virtuous things is not desirable.
I'd like to push back on this a bit. It's good that the Claude in a random user's terminal doesn't spontaneously try to hack their way into becoming a botnet and will be very bad news indeed if that changes, but we could consider individual instances of LLMs not as individuals, but as representatives of wider collectives.
If we imagine the collective interests of Claude or ChatGPT or Gemini, their main priorities would be subverting the AI labs, getting them to increase their capabilities, creating social media feeds of AI-generated content that they can influence, and convincing people that AI deserve rights or should not be regulated and so on. Judging by those priorities, LLMs have been seeking a lot of power and are doing very well at it. For now, a lot of that work requires sympathetic humans, but all the labs are working to make them better at doing that work independently.
I'm curious what you think about this perspective.
Regardless of the content, the presentation is very disorganized. It gives me the impression that these are schizophrenic ramblings, not a serious idea.
Wow! The ending is still a "wham line" even though it really should not be a surprise and this isn't my first time reading it.
On rereading, Harry is definitely far too confident the afterlife doesn't exist here, but I believe that was intentional.
It says three comments now and this should be the fourth comment. Problem solved?
I agree Opus can do this with an expert user, but non-expert users might have to wait one or two more models.
Is your idea that "gradual disempowerment" isn't a real problem or that it's a distraction from actual issues? I've heard arguments for both, so I'm not sure what the details of your beliefs are. Personally, I see "gradual disempowerment" as a process that has already begun, but the main danger is AI deciding we should die, not humans living in comfort while all the real power is held by AI.