Lao Mein

I give full permission for anyone to post part or all of any of my comments/posts to other platforms, with attribution.

Currently open to international job offers and interested in getting a Masters/PhD. Experienced in bioinformatics and summarizing research.

Wiki Contributions

Comments

There's so many that I'm having trouble choosing just one. Can anyone recommend one for bioinformatics research? I would like something to help with hypothesis discovery, but am hoping to discover something that I currently don't know about.

Do you know of any AI tools where I can input a table of labeled genetic data and get out an interesting hypothesis? If nothing like that exists, I should probably make one myself.

If socialist workplaces actually had all those benefits, they would already be taking over much of the economy. But we don't see very many co-ops in the wild. My personal experience is that unions and co-ops tend to shift compensation to those with seniority and those involved with corporate politics instead of the skilled, productive, and competent ones. This then causes more time and energy to be spent on corporate politics and drives out the most productive employees. 

You're very much underestimating the effects of the top-performers at a business. The market has run the experiment of comparing socialist firms to capitalist ones for more than a century and every result has shown that socialist firms just aren't competitive. Yes, there are benefits to the less productive employees. But the cost of driving out the productives has been shown to be higher in just about every sector. Hence why there aren't very many socialist firms.

I can't remember the exact source, but I believe that CICERO was optimized with the expectation of anonymity. In fact, all players in the games CICERO played were anonymous. CICERO was optimized with the assumption that other players would have no knowledge of its past history (and hence expected behavior). Versions of CICERO that were optimized with the assumption that other players would treat it according to its past history were explicitly noted as being more vindictive.

Now that I think about it, this probably gave CICERO a significant advantage. Most human games are played with player names visible. Anonymous play is thus a deviation from the standard metagame. The Meta team noted that players played more vindictively than optimal and that CICERO got an advantage for being less vindictive. Since these were top players, it implies that the human players simply didn't fully adjust to the anonymous format. I don't recall any CICERO games with public names in the paper; maybe the results were less impressive?

I'm using a weird definition of AI here, basically "an AI that can do my job". I'm imagining a cobbled-together system of transformers that individually automates everything I can do, thereby replacing most of the information jobs like coding, scientific research, and advertising. So in a lot of the worlds where AGI happens, there's no hard takeoff. AIs are helping do AI research, and maybe labor isn't a major limiting factor in AI development anymore. But there isn't a >1 OOM increase in AI research output from AI.

This also means that I think in most of the 30% there is no hard takeoff. Some low-hanging fruit is picked by machines, but not enough for a FOOM.

Thanks for bringing up the contradiction, though. I really need to go back and clarify a lot of my statements.

A full explanation of the replication crisis and how to evaluate scientific papers would be really nice. Most smart science-adjacent (and a lot of scientists!) still believe pop-science conceptions of studies like Dunning-Kreuger and Rat Utopia. Encouraging critical thinking, even of results from high-status scientists, would really improve the smart-normie memespace. It's pretty crazy how much my understanding of science has changed since I learned how the sausage was made. As things are, there aren't many ways for someone who isn't a scientist themselves to learn of the replication crisis and its consequences.

I'd be willing to write the script myself if prizes for the script contest are still being given.

I am. I had pretty low grades in College (~2.0 GDP), and from what I've read I would need a lot of work experience and accomplishments to get into a Master's program. I think I need to convince a professor directly in order to get in. Do you have any recommendations? 

If you're ever actually seriously considering human extinction, you should probably realize that you're much more likely to be deluded or mentally ill than actually facing the dilemma you think you're facing. The correct play here would be to check yourself into a mental hospital. 

I also apply this principle if Omega ever appears to tell me that I can trust something with p=1. Since Omega doesn't actually exist, I'm almost certainly on a bad acid trip and should go lie down somewhere.

The band of malicious messages generated by advanced aliens that will both kill us and be detected by a panel of human experts seems extremely narrow. We're talking about the FDA being able to outsmart an AI running on a Matrioshka brain levels of narrow.

We then have to weigh the potential gains we get from utilizing the message without having to wait for the speed of bureaucracy. How many lives can we save by earlier implementation of alien technology? Plus, confirmation of alien civilizations make existential risk just regular risk. If we can see them, the fate of our light cone depends on their magnamity anyways. 

My calculations put the odds of a committee being able to achieve any good so low that we're better off just not having one.

I assume this is to promote the infohazard policies that a lot of Rat-associated AI alignment teams are using?

Load More