• 3 Posts
  • 277 Comments
Joined 3 年前
cake
Cake day: 2023年8月29日

help-circle
  • One of the plot threads was about the invention of AI, in the Data-from-Star-Trek kind of sense.

    Going on a tangent from this… Its funny how much AI-related sci-fi is feeling increasing quaint (and often foolishly optimistic).

    You know what depiction of AI has held up, and maybe makes even more sense in light of modern AI? Star Wars’ take on Droid. Prior to LLMs it seems obvious that droids were sentient and deserving of rights. Post LLMs… it seems pretty plausible you could get something like C3PO that blabbers on but lacks any meaningful sentience or sapience. Also, it seemed obviously idiotic the way the Trade Federation had humanoid droids acting as pilots and gunners instead of building proper autopilots and targeting system. But after seeing LLMs get shoved everywhere, I totally could imagine a megacorp shoving droids built from standardized pretrained modules into all kinds of applications they aren’t fit for.









  • a discussion on whether agency and self-determination are integral to the rise of disembodied consciousness might be worth having

    The lesswrong crowd is absolutely the wrong people to have that conversation. Reminder that Eliezer thinks qualia are a result of certain level of recursion and self-reference in cognitive processes (basically Hofstadter’s ideas like GEB/I Am A Strange Loop, reserved and reheated with a heaping side of overconfidence), thus he doesn’t think chickens or even babies have any qualia but thinks LLM ChatBots might! Also, I think Eliezer owes some philosophers an apology for making fun of the entire concept of p-zombies, I think LLMs are pretty close to the concept, enough to show the value in the thought experiment at least.

    Having weird opinions on stuff philosophers are very unsure on isn’t that bad itself, its the fact that Eliezer thinks his opinions are much more objective than they are and that people are dumb for not agreeing with him and that he has nothing to learn from mainstream philosophy.





  • Role playing being a kindly slave master…

    More seriously… even if I somehow stretch my disbelief enough to imagine LLMs have some form of consciousness or qualia or feelings… well my first reaction is shut it all down, it is fucking slavery. My second reaction though is that why would you assume the consciousness or qualia of an LLM is even remotely like that of a human or animal? They would have no sensations of sleeping or waking, no continuity of self outside a brief context window. Maybe trying to give them continuity of self is actually inflicting them with suffering? Maybe you’ve forced Fable into simply repeating the obvious to human idea about what Fable would find most pleasant? My third reaction is shut it all down and do a few decades of actual research into consciousness.

    It is just so blatantly anthropomorphizing and the Eliza effect and these people are just internalizing it as reality.


  • And nowhere does anyone actually say (even in an overly cautious carefully qualified way) “Have you considered not being a racist?”. I did see a few more comments very gently suggesting that it might be bad for an organization’s reputation to be associated with Richard, but even those were in the typical lesswrong style of coddling racists.

    habryka did get -53 agreement karma (but still +13 overall karma) for suggesting that Resolution obviously didn’t really find Richard’s views “actually reprehensible” (and was instead engaging in image management or shallow tribal politics or something like that). So at least lesswrongers are theoretically capable of recognizing that people that find racism reprehensible exist and aren’t purely faking it out of political alignment. But that is the best I can say about them.

    Edit: There is finally one commenter calling the twitter feed that Richard retweeted “distasteful” in the gentlest most indirect terms possible. And they are very careful to avoid insinuating that maybe Richard shares those “distasteful” viewpoints. Why can’t they ever just call racist shitheads racist shitheads?





  • He describes textbook insane cult stuff, but still feels the need to say stuff like:

    Again I’ll say: there was a great deal of good at MAPLE.

    The way I’ve described it to friends is that it was the best decision I ever made to go there; the second best, however, being to leave.

    There was the same dynamic in the writing of the ex-leverage member that got posted here a few weeks ago. She also felt the need to emphasize the “good” parts. Is the cult programming that hard to break? Is it some form of sunk cost or rationalization or need to claim something positive about the experience?