site banner
PaperclipPerfector  5mo ago (text post)   23862 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of June 10, 2024

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

7
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

[E]xpecting an artificial intelligence to converge on one very specific metric […] seems doubtful.

The framework under which the whole paperclip analogy was developed was a Yudkowskian framework in which the most powerful AIs would all be explicitly designed to maximize a certain objective function. In the original paperclip story, it’s a paperclip factory owner that has an AGI maximize the number of paperclips produced. The moral of the original story is thus most similar to the classic “be careful what you wish for” trickster genie tales.

But as we all very well know now, this framework which Yudkowsky spent over a decade elaborating upon is almost completely divergent from the current LLM-based methods that have yielded the powerful systems of today.

But as we all very well know now, this framework which Yudkowsky spent over a decade elaborating upon is almost completely divergent from the current LLM-based methods that have yielded the powerful systems of today.

Which of course very much does not mean that we're safe.

At this point if Yudkowsky says something, I accept that as weak evidence that the opposite is true.

I dismissed Yudkowsy as having anything useful to add when I listened to him on Brian Chau's podcast and learned that he has zero practical experience with AI.

This is supposed to be the thing you're most passionate about and concerned with, and you never even bothered to tinker around with PyTorch or something like it? IIRC he didn't even understand what Chau was talking about when he said PyTorch.

Imagine someone who makes their life's work opining on video games but they never actually played one, everything they know is based on second-hand knowledge and their own speculation.

Imagine someone who makes their life's work opining on video games but they never actually played one, everything they know is based on second-hand knowledge and their own speculation.

I am reminded of Anita Sarkeesian's initial Feminist Frequency videos where she claimed to have been playing games all her life then proceeded to make factually incorrect assertions about some games (Hitman, IIRC) rewarding misogynist behavior (murdering women) when those games instead disincentivized it.

Imagine someone who makes their life's work opining on video games but they never actually played one, everything they know is based on second-hand knowledge and their own speculation.

This concept made for a decently successful website though (Kotaku). (And I mean this literally and not just as a jab, that many of their writers often obviously had never even played the games they would express severe outrage about.)

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats