> But still - why is consciousness required?
Did someone say it is? Parent explicitly called it out as a by-product.
4,288 karma · joined August 21, 2013
Did someone say it is? Parent explicitly called it out as a by-product.
vs
> A bimetallic strip is intelligent
You're moving the goal posts
But that all depends on whether, "land upright and measure things with the expensive instruments we sent it with" was originally included as a primary objective and whether they've just moved the goal posts to minimize the appearance of the failure.
But if you compare peak (Nov '21) to peak (Jan '24) we're essentially flat at 1.4% annualized.
If a business accustomed to double digit growth every year instead saw 1.4% growth annualized over 2 years then the numbers simply can't work out to keep doing what they've always done.
The fact that equity valuations are WAY better than they were in Oct '22 doesn't really help because nobody was raising money during the down turn in the first place! Everyone is priced in on pre-pandemic valuations, which for the most part are unchanged.
Note: I used the NASDAQ-100 Technology Sector, ticker NDXT to calculate these numbers [0].
Knowing that you can configure your phone's behavior should be a basic point of technology literacy. I know that it isn't at 100% today, but what percent of users are now going to have yet another forced decision to make before using their phone for the first time, just so a minority of technology illiterate users can be "educated".
Some, like Elon, may seem to be untouchable in the end, but I can’t imagine this is good at all for Carta’s – checks notes – cap table?
If someone came to me with some outlandish claim, "Studies show that singing in the shower lowers cancer risk," I honestly won't be surprised if they could produce 2-4 white papers published in modern journals in support of it. So much of modern science seems to be reading between the lines and meta-analyses of scientific studies.
Scott Alexander's review of Ivermectin[0] is a great example of this. Bold claim is made, everyone divides into two camps, and in fact both camps have multiple peer reviewed studies backing their side, and to arrive at some semblance of understanding of the topic you need to spend hours diving into the studies and checking off boxes: were they peer reviewed, were there confounders, do the authors have a history of fraud, and on and on and on.
[0] https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/ivermectin-much-more-than-y...
I think a cold shower in the morning, when I do make it happen, gives me a can-do and energetic emotional state for the rest of the day. Force your body to start moving, and the mind follows.
Once you see folks replacing their beat-up 1992 Honda Civic with EVs then you'll know that "they save you money" is actually a thing.
This is a big reason I haven't even considered an EV. How I'd find someone to do this work on my garage, and how much it would cost is a huge unknown, and that's just enough friction to simply not consider getting an EV.
My vehicles are first and foremost utilitarian; I use them to get from A to B. EVs make that simple equation "complicated", and I have other issues maintaining a household that demand my attention.
TLDR; Grindavík is located in Iceland, a country known for its volcanic activity. Earthquakes and land deformation have exploded in frequency in the area under and around the small town of 4,000 people and geologists expect a volcanic eruption is imminent. The town has been evacuated.
Of course these days by the time you get to the jewelry phase, this kind of matchmaking is usually resolved anyway. I suspect the tradition started much longer ago when folks got married very quickly (compared to today’s standards).
They want them because they are pretty and because – like it or not – it’s what society has taught them to expect.
Even the small effort of measuring your creamer with a teaspoon instead of just pouring it in the cup just takes more time and effort than simply checking what time it is.
They're just going through bankruptcy, not dissolving the company. WeWork will be around for many years to come.
It is not by ensuring that literally anyone with a computer has an equal chance at creating it.
But super off-hand idea if I'm trying to be creative. The AGI formulates a chemical that kills humans 90 days after inhalation, hires a chemical lab to synthesize it and forward it to municipalities across the world, and convinces them it's a standard treatment that the WHO has mandated be introduced.
> And how would regulating models thwart this?
I don't think it would. The OP article is about regulation that increases the access to the ingredients for AI, and I'm simply unconvinced that is a recipe for increasing AI safety.
It does not; I was speaking to AGI. But assuming you were referring to AGI as well, you don't have to think very creatively to consider scenarios where it would be harmful.
If you have an agent that can counter your every move with its own superior move, and that agent wants something – anything – differently from what you want, then who wins? Maybe it wants the money in your bank account, maybe it wants to use the atoms in your body to make more graphics cards to reproduce itself.
Think about playing a game of chess against the strongest AI opponent. No matter which move you are considering playing, your opponent has already planned 10 steps ahead and will make a better move than you. Now extrapolate outside the chess board and into the realm where you can use the internet to buy/trade stocks, attack national infrastructure, send custom orders to chemists to follow whatever directions you want, etc.
> it's not a secret how metamphetamine is made
I didn't say it was a secret. But try sharing the recipe to methamphetamine virtually anywhere online and see how long it stays up; we do in fact try to at least make it moderately difficult to find this information. Perfect is the enemy of good here.
> No one - I believe - knows how to build an AGI.
The problem is that if we wait until someone does know how to build an AGI, then the game is up. We do not know if the weights behind GPT-4 will be a critical ingredient. If you make the ingredients common knowledge before you know they were in fact The Ingredients, you've let the cat out of the bag and there's no retrieving it.
Do we have reason to believe that giving the ingredients of AGI out to the general public accelerates safety research faster than capabilities research?
No, GPT-4 is not AGI and is not going to spell the end of the human race, but neither is pseudoephedrine itself a methamphetemine and yet we regulate its access. Not as a matter of protecting corporate profits, but for public safety.
You'll need to convince me first that there is in fact no public safety hazard from forcing unrestricted access to the ingredients in this recipe. Do I trust OpenAI to make all the morally right choices here? No, but I think their incentives are in fact more aligned with the public good than are the lowest common denominator of the general public.
* Simply keeping the rider on the sled and moving, which for those who have played is not a simple task for a beginner
* Synchronizing it to the music
* The artistic selection of what to show when and where, and getting all of the pieces in place, for example keeping things off screen but nearby until they are needed, and then positioning their velocity vector to just match what you need
* The simple task of managing the artifact which is the course itself; how do you manipulate it and move it around and know precisely where to put a line for a given effect
* The intimate knowledge of the underlying physics at play in Line Rider
Surely there is some sort of software-assissted level editor for Line Rider out there? How much of the level is worked out backwards from the desired velocity and position of a given character?
Frankly it is not dissimilar from writing code at a modern company. At first you think your job is to write code, then you learn that a successful project relies on orchestrating dependencies, teams, artifacts, build times, infrastructure, sweet talking, etc. And so much of it happens off screen!
Other things I'd consider:
* Longevity is associated with community, something the church is very good at
* Even elderly individuals are required to perform "a calling", giving them meaning and purpose later in life
* Mormons have a lot of children, and so when you're older you usually have a very strong social safety net
* Mormons have lower divorce rates, and divorce is correlated with greater mortality
As an agnostic and raising kids, I spend a lot of time now pondering how – if at all – to pass on as many of these benefits of Mormonism to my kids without mandating the magical beliefs, and I have to say it's difficult. But I think you do have to have some healthy middle-ground mix of conservatism and collectivisms just to strike a healthy balance with modern individualism and liberalism.