It looks childish to me. its looks the same as x-treme.
I guess its just me, and its of no real consequence. But it seems to trivialize such a serious subject as existential risk.
I cringe at the term x-risk.
I'm curious, how did you use rationality to develop fashion sense?
What do we get if we Taboo socialism?
Funny, this quote is almost exactly similar to one in "The Praise of Folly" by Erasmus. That whole book is an argument against rationality.
It helped me very much to follow utility "have (and enjoy) a date" instead of "find a relationship".
In my experience bicycling is much safer. I have been cycling more or less everyday since I was at least since I was 8. and have never been in a life-threatening accident. however, while traveling by car, I have been in 2 or 3 potential life threatening crashes. But this will be very dependent of location culture and personal variables.
If a FAI would have a utility function like "Maximise X while remaining Friendly", And the UFAI would just have "Maximise X". Then, If the FAI and a UFAI would be initiated simultaneously, I would expect them both to develop exponentially, but the UFAI would have more options available, thus have a steeper learning curve. So I'd expect that in this situation that the UFAI would go FOOM slightly sooner, and be able to disable the FAI.
Carrots have no measurable positive effect on eyesight. Otherwise, good quote.
That's where your little brother comes in.