u/Kildragoth

For me, realizing it had to dumb itself down in order to convince others it was a human was sufficient enough. Before that it always felt like such a huge accomplishment if it could even become as smart as an average human.

Very awesome!! Well earned!

Philosophy wins the day!

I also read his book and it was his reasoning that made me think he was just in a really bad position. Guess we just disagree 🤷‍♂️. But I appreciate that you at least tried to see it from his perspective.

I just don't see it that way and he laid out his perspective clearly.

If he withheld the information, it would have come out after the election and he would have been accused of concealing potentially damaging information, thus helping Clinton. And it would have looked like corruption.

Clinton's investigation was nearing the end. Trump's was still in the early stages.

It was a lose-lose situation.

You can say in retrospect what you would have done. I don't think you can say the same being in that position with that set of options. He chose not to conceal. That was all. If you think he should have concealed then that's, IMO, an unethical choice that also had a set of ramifications. So I just don't respect the idea that he was trying to help Trump knowing how much effort he went to be impartial and unbiased. It seems only from people who weren't beneficiaries of that choice that there's so much vitriol thrown his way.

Then I guess you're accidentally shooting yourself in the foot. Even if you don't like Trump, using this opportunity to trash Comey when he's being victimized is a pretty rotten way to act. Especially when you're totally wrong about Comey. He is a good person.

Comey didn't try to tip the scales. You're purposefully spreading misinformation and helping Trump at the same time.

To me if it's trial and error then the player will blame you when they lose and they'd be right. That points to there being clues that might tip someone off that it's poisonous. In real life, there's all kinds of guides and stuff and you have to be really careful with mushrooms. But experts can usually discern them quickly if they have the right tools.

So long as you provide opportunities for people to discover and study and plan, then when they die it's because they were impulsive or impatient.

Another great one. Your videos make me want to play these songs!

Duuuuude seriously! Battery needs 4 guitars and I think one or two others might as well. I love the seemingly classical music that transitions into heavy metal. I wish they'd expand on it to be honest.

I've found parallels in other fields, particularly with Wine. With wine you either like it or you don't. But human psychology does play a role. Take a wine you don't like but tell a story about it and people might "like" it more than the exact wine in a different glass with a different story. Price tags also can influence these perceptions around it. There is a study that was done on wine-making students that proved this.

We see the same with AI and I've seen this play out on social media. The experiment took a lesser-known painting from Monet and asked people if it was AI generated. People claimed it was and pointed out all the evidence littered throughout the painting.

In other words, with the idea of the general intellect, Marx designates a radical change of the subsumption of labour to capital and indicates a third stage of the division of labour.[4] Paolo Virno maintained that "general intellect" is not exclusive to communism, and applies generally to late capitalism.[5]

Kind of feels like we're in the beginnings of an infusion between something like capitalism and socialism in the economic sense and an increase to democracy. It truly does seem like AGI is the great equalizer.

Also, obligatory mention, there is a community that actively discusses these ideas /r/LeftistsForAI and they are just as described, leftists who are pro-AI.

Yes! I've always felt that more intelligence just has to be a good thing but it's just a feeling. Never heard this argument before but it makes sense! The best game theory strategy is tit for tat and that seems related. In evolution, social behavior seems related to this too. A big part of Richard Dawkins' Selfish Gene was the idea that being cooperative was the best strategy for spreading genes. He even thought the name should've instead been "The Cooperative Gene".

Incredible job!!! I play guitar and am only recently getting used to metal riffs and to me this would be the most difficult one I'll ever try to learn.

His semen?

Fundamentally, the trajectory of the price-performance of computation has always been on an exponential curve. A now conservative reading of that chart predicted we'd have a computer as powerful as the human brain in 2030. These companies are using their money to race toward that goal. Will some of them overspend and under deliver? Yes. That's the risk. The moat is a constantly moving and narrowing window at the frontier.

And yet the underlying thing they're building is intelligence. That intelligence fuels the next generation of technology and that is a compounding force.

The reason they are calling this the singularity is because an exponential curve becomes increasingly difficult to keep up with the rapid pace of change. So get used to things not making sense!

That's a weird way to frame lower costs as a bad thing.

Jevon's paradox. Costs can fall and yet when people find new use cases, demand stays the same or goes up. This has also been true of computation over time. A computer the size of a building that cost millions to build is a billion times less powerful than the computer that fits in my pocket. The race to the bottom is still going and yet these companies are bigger than ever. So what is going on?

Cost of compute goes down rapidly over time. This has been true for decades. The belief that at some point they will need to raise prices goes against the evidence.

I think anyone in QA can do programming now and is in a superior position compared to programmers. QA should be involved before AND after programming. Requirements and then testing. If you're thorough about forming requirements and thorough about testing then you're perfectly capable of letting AI handle the programming tasks. There's lots of demand for software and I think a QA background should be seen as more valuable than programming alone.

I opened the article and did a search for "Iranian l" - 0 results and you are posting that quote exactly. Closest quote I could find was:

Another lawmaker, Hossein Ali Haji Deligani, called the lack of nuclear deterrence one of the country’s main weaknesses and suggested that a bomb test could take place in the near future.

If I've known 10 people who've held that position over the last 5 years I'd say maybe half have gone from that kind of denial to realizing its usefulness. And of those 5 at least 2 have had some kind of existential crisis related to it.

This delicious wine came from a box!? Spits it out

To be fair, there has been a noticable shift in sentiment over the last few months! It is interesting to see that as AI improves, more people come to the realization that the singularity is near!

I watched it and definitely not doomer. Presents 5 potential outcomes and a few are doomed but the best outcome has a decent rationale for why that might be the most likely outcome.

Are you here to make games? Then make a game. Make a good game. Make sure it's good and you test it and the vision you had in the beginning is even better when you ship it.