‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

AI safety is mostly a sex cult

344 points · 330 comments · Tomte

  1. perlgeek · · focus · HN ↗
    I've tried to read this, but somehow the article doesn't really come to a point. Is there any point besides Yud not being perfect, and having connections to people who openly talk about their sex life (and that it's somewhat non-standard)?
    1. sauwan · · focus · HN ↗
      I think the point is that Yud and the rationalist community have put themselves in an awkward position where their lifestyle now depends on "p(doom) is big" being true. Which means they can't necessarily be trusted to give unbiased updates on the true level of risk we're facing as new data and information comes up.

      Can "ASI will inevitably kill us all" be falsifiable before we create ASI? If not, then what separates it from religion?

      Not sure how much I agree with that position, but that's just how I understood it.

      1. Viliam1234 · · focus · HN ↗
        > their lifestyle now depends on "p(doom) is big" being true

        How?

        Suppose that for the following 20 or even 100 years nothing happens. The AIs miraculously stay as they are today, the further progress turns out to be impossible, there will be no more agents hacking various websites, no cyber warfare involving AI agents, nothing. There will be the year 2026, forever.

        How would any of that impact the lifestyle of anyone in the rationalist community? Please be more specific with your accusation.

        (Seems like the rationalists are simultaneously the dark lords of TESCREAL, pulling the strings of the world's most powerful billionaires and politicians, but also irrelevant weird nerds who can be ruined at any moment by a smart blogger explaining how their opinions are silly, or even that they know each other.)

        1. nullc · · focus · HN ↗
          As an example, in that example who pays for the orgy compound on Telegraph Ave?
Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.