ThenElection
No bio...
User ID: 622
ThenElection
2hr ago
The line here is "don't be an idiot; the vast majority of women will regret having a train run on them, even if they say they're cool with it in the moment." If someone starts bringing in legalese about consent, you repeat. Ideally you've earned the respect of your frat brothers, and they'll listen: it's most likely they're just naive, not malicious.
ThenElection
3hr ago
Fault is a tool we use to create better outcomes, by justifying legal and social punishments. Assigning fault to them allows us to channel energy into creating new norms and expectations that would otherwise be dissipated in questions of "how much ketamine can a girl snort off a guy's cock before the guy can't have sex with her."
She's at fault, too, but gotta choose your battles.
It's a central issue in the consent framework. Is sex behind closed doors between consenting adults ever wrong? The actual answer is yes, because consent is insufficient. But because the only way people can criticize the morality of a sexual act is by shoving it into a consent framework, you end up with convoluted, unsatisfying (to everyone!) arguments about whether the exact scenario constituted legal consent.
The men are the parties that did the greater wrong, here, and it has nothing to do with the details of her consent or non-consent. The very limited defense I have of them is that they are confused in believing that consent is the moral line, and that's what media and various bureaucracies have told them since birth; but that doesn't change that the act is well-over the actual line.
ThenElection
21hr ago
I'm not sure we can fairly attribute the SBF shenanigans to Yud.
The rest seems on point, though I don't really care about the cults and the shrimp supremacists. Any group that explicitly is about a radical reconsideration of norms and thought will run into that error mode if it builds a somewhat broad community. E.g. Protestantism has some pretty wild subgroups. If Motte-thought somehow spread widely throughout society, you'd have tons of weird offshoots, if it doesn't already.
Yud's most damning trait isn't any of that, but that he's the single most accelerationist figure in history. At least a thousand times more so than Beff Jezos or Andreessen, plausibly a million. Since working to avoid AI doom is not just his core principle but the foundation of his personality and claim to fame, he deserves to be hit hard on that, and I don't think he has ever really grappled with it or how he went wrong.
Misallocation of weirdness points is probably a distant second after that.
ThenElection
5d ago
But it doesn't. That money is recycled throughout the economy
This is just the broken windows fallacy, gussied up. Higher oil prices mean that people use less oil than they would otherwise; this is a global economic distortion. The half a trillion dollars number isn't coming from naively multiplying the delta in oil prices (that gets you the trillion dollar number) but from (necessarily counterfactual) GDP deltas. I guess a hardcore climate change person could eliminate a lot of those costs by saying oil usage is a net negative.
And, although I don't expect many people to be sympathetic here to Iran's economy, massive destruction of capital is massive destruction of capital.
ThenElection
5d ago
I am glad that we've achieved the pre-war status quo, at an economic cost of a half trillion dollars or so.
Though, you also have claimed oil flows had been restored and complete US victory several times before. Maybe this time it'll stick. It'd be rational for Iran to accept peace on pretty much any terms, but that's been true for awhile.
ThenElection
6d ago
https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n-26-62.pdf from today seems relevant; may be applied retroactively.
ThenElection
6d ago
There is an enforcement mechanism:
§ 367. Suits to enforce the requirements of § 365(a) of this title.
Though, surprisingly, there's apparently no case law (according to my lawyer on retainer, Claude McClaude Esq.) around a PBC not fulfilling its public benefit. There is for shareholders' financial benefit: Drakes Landing Associates, L.P. v. Tilden Park Capital Management, L.P. It was dismissed, though, as the plaintiffs didn't account for the other purposes.
It does seem like it disempowers shareholders, without adding meaningful checks to enforce the public benefit. If you're not looking out for shareholder financial interests, it's because you're looking out for the public benefit; if you're not looking out for the public benefit, it's because you're looking out for financial interests.
Nice for insiders, and maybe has the benefit of making nuisance suits harder to prove.
It's also worth pointing out that the "avoid the weirdos" heuristic is probably an actively counterproductive strategy for a VC. You avoid Holmes types, but you also avoid Larry Page, Mark Zuckerberg, Altman, Amodei, Musk types. Since the latter group is where VCs take the large majority of their profits, they'd be reduced to a bunch of small, conventional bets that don't sustain the model.
ThenElection
10d ago
If we are going to insist on creating beings far more intelligent and capable than we are, and capable of causing us great amounts of pain, knowing how to cause them great amounts of pain seems extremely valuable. We'll still lose, but at least we might get some licks in.
ThenElection
10d ago
This proves too much. Imagine an alien lifeform: it won't have nociceptors, and it won't have the narrow form of a nervous system that you prescribe as necessary to feel pain. Does that mean the alien lifeform categorically can't feel pain?
You might say that it will have reward circuits implemented in whatever biological hardware it has, so we can extend our "pain" to those lifeforms. Sure. But as soon as you treat pain as something arising from reward circuits, that's a giant hole you can drive an LLM through as well. You've then got to think about exactly what kind of reward circuits qualify and which don't.
Unless you're willing to bite a bullet and say that pain is unique in humans and near relatives, and categorically nothing else in the universe has or could ever have what we'd call pain. It makes a certain amount of sense as a philosophical stance, but it's not likely to be a useful stance if we ever engage with extraterrestrial lifeforms.
ThenElection
11d ago
That doesn't make it unfakeable. Just have the AI break down the story into a plausible sequence of edits and schedule for publishing the commit hashes to the blockchain. By design you still have the latency of writing but don't have to actually write anything.
ThenElection
11d ago
Timelapses can be faked, too.
ThenElection
11d ago
You're going to have blood on your hands if he kills himself in response to these racist, colonialist attacks.
ThenElection
13d ago
Xicheng (near Tiananmen), 11.9M USD, ~4k USD/sq ft (estimated): https://bj.lizihang.com/siheyuanchushou/783052.html
Dongcheng (contains Tiananmen), 8.8M USD, 3121 USD/sq ft: https://mbj.lizihang.com/siheyuanchushou/872357.html
These seem lower end than the ones in the article, though, at least the finishings.
ThenElection
13d ago
Luxury condos of course wildly outnumber them in Beijing, but if you're interested in elite siheyuan:
ThenElection
14d ago
If it takes 100 Million worth of compute to train an LLM, I don't think a company is going to give an LLM-Agent the ability to just start up training runs for the "Self" part of RSI.
Two different responses:
-
RSI is a continuum; AI companies will continue to use humans as long as they add anything to the process, but AIs will play a larger and larger role. Today, human researchers mostly provide taste; actually writing up JAX or GPU kernels to implement a research idea, on the other hand, is a place AI dominates humans. That human taste is incredibly valuable--likely allowing pruning the nodes of a research tree by multiple orders of magnitude--but that edge is temporary.
-
The actual research process would involve thousands of small, cheap experiments to find promising candidates; selecting those and scaling them up to bigger and harder experiments; and repeating. By the time you're up to multimillion dollar training runs, you already have a pretty solid idea of your candidates' scaling curves. To the extent it's a gamble, it's a gamble that you also have to make on a human-designed model. Humans will still make the ultimate decision to go ahead with something that'll cost 8 or more figures, but they'll quickly become rubber stamps.
Out of curiosity, pulled up the post:
https://old.reddit.com/r/medicine/comments/1wmbn87/a_pt_showed_me_proof_that_eating_toilet_paper/
"Google AI" so, presumably, the search model. Even there, I'm unable to reproduce. The closest I can get is by searching "why does eating toilet paper cause you to poop more," but even there, it includes paragraphs and paragraphs of verbiage saying it's unsafe and dangerous.
I think that they should probably add some classifier that categorizes queries into regular users and idiots, and then for the idiots generate a text that cannot possibly be selectively taken out of context or misinterpreted.
for those of you who use AI for work outside of programming
Mostly for programming, but at this point there's a bunch of other, mostly administrative things it's useful for. From the past week:
-
Identifying work I've done, for reporting upwards
-
Juggling bugs/issues
-
Creating the skeleton of design docs (with the caveat I have it create the outline, headings, text plugs, and tables/graphs/diagrams, without writing the actual text content, which remains terrible)
-
Extracting action items from emails, meeting notes, chat messages
-
Random formatting things for spreadsheets
-
Creating recipient lists for emails and lists of attendees for meetings (along with figuring out scheduling for the meeting)
-
Researching existing documentation and design docs to describe how a system works today, and verifying the actual system implementation works as described
-
Crawling the calendars of coworkers, to see if there are meetings I should be invited to but haven't been.
-
Gantt charts
ThenElection
14d ago
But it's not like she was ground down by the experience of trying to improve the education her daughter was receiving. Instead, she basically just assumed that her daughter was being taught, took the school's word for it that they were doing a good job, and... That's it. No actual effort to bully the school into shape. If she had, she could have changed course for her daughter much more quickly.
Even given her ideology, it doesn't make sense. She should have been working to improve the school for the collective, instead of whatever it is she did.
ThenElection
14d ago
Importantly, the group will not be responsible for advising us on how to pace our internal progress on mathematics.
Sigh. We still get the end times, but only the blessed get to see exciting mathematical results in the meantime. Worst of all worlds. I guess at least mathematicians' egos get to be protected.
ThenElection
14d ago
I'm pretty comfortable that the answer is "not contributing anything at all,"
Actively harmful, in many cases. See e.g. the fad to ban algebra from middle schools for equity reasons, which wasn't coming from the teachers (who aren't innocents in the sorry state of the educational system, but their roles are at least grounded in something real).
ThenElection
14d ago
I miss the good ole days, when one of the debates was around models having Internet access. People very seriously argued that AI would always be safe, because nobody would be dumb enough to give an AI access to the public Internet, and that all the people saying otherwise were hysterical fearmongers who were imagining absurd scenarios and supposing we would be implausibly irresponsible.
ThenElection
14d ago
What a wild dereliction of parental responsibility. How do you go nearly a decade without realizing your kid is learning nothing except how to avoid getting stabbed in the lunch room?
I guess if it's any consolation, NHJ has made a lot of money in the meantime by giving moral cover for rich coastal elites to sabotage the education of potential competitors, so whatever permanent damage she did to her daughter, there's a nice financial cushion for her and a pretty unobstructed path to admission to an elite university, so she'll be fine.
It's important for us to build BSL-4 facilities working on creating COVID-2027, to better prepare us to respond when the other dastardly lab does the same thing irresponsibly.
I'm torn here between steelmanning the likely thought process of Dario here, versus not doing what amounts to pro bono marketing for a lab acting wildly irresponsibly by my actual standards.
In a hyper individuated world, women can't control their sexuality. Neither can men. That's why, in every society in history sexuality has been heavily regulated by custom and law.
Maybe libertarian sexuality works really well for some subset of hyper-rational economically privileged people living in a co-op in Berkeley. Maybe. But for the large majority of people, men and women, that leads to ruin. Predictably, and we as a society have to bear the costs. Descriptively, they can't assess risk or bear consequences when their gambit fails, which calls for external regulation.
More options
Context Copy link