Is this a correct characterisation of the EA community? That they all harbour anti-abortion sentiment but for whatever reason permit abortion?
I actually wouldn't be surprised if this were the case -- the whole schtick of a lot of these people is "worrying about increasing the number of future possibly-existing humans, even at the cost of the suffering of actually-existing humans", so being anti-abortion honestly seems not too far out of their wheelhouse?
Like I think in the EAverse you can just kinda go "well this makes people have less kids which means less QALYs therefore we all know it's obviously bad and I don't really need to justify it." (with bonus internet contrarian points if you are justifying some terrible thing using your abstract math, because that means you're Highly Decoupled and Very Smart.) See also the quote elsewhere in this thread about the guy defending child marriage for similar reasons.
I... think (hope??) the "" is representing filled in squares in the crossword and that he has a grid of characters. But in that case the problem is super easy, you just need to print out HTML table tags between each character and color the table cell black when the character is "". It takes like 10 minutes to solve without chatgpt already. :/
I would blame the rise of smartphones for that too. Somehow everyone became convinced that if tech isn't radically upending everyone's lives every 10 years then something is wrong. But hey, maybe our lives don't need tech companies to disrupt them anymore actually?
I think he means script as in, literally a series of lines to say to your doctor to magically hack their brain into giving you the prescription you need (gee, I wonder how these people ever got into pickup artistry!), not a script as in prescription. I think it's not about cost, it's about doctors... prescribing you the wrong thing for some reason so you have to lie to them to get the correct medication? Is this some conspiracy theory I'm not aware of, lol
For your team of developers to deploy at the speed and scale that you need to lead in the market, your developers must be empowered with AI at every step of the software development life cycle, customized and fine-tuned to your codebase.
I feel like I know who the target audience for this post is, and it's not programmers
What I don't get is, ok, even granting the insane Eliezer assumption that LLMs can become arbitrarily smart and learn to reverse hash functions or whatever because it helps them predict the next word sometimes... humans don't entirely understand biology ourselves! How is the LLM going to acquire the knowledge of biology to know how to do things humans can't do when it doesn't have access to the physical world, only things humans have written about it?
Even if it is using its godly intelligence to predict the next word, wouldn't it only be able to predict the next word as it relates to things that have already been discovered through experiment? What's his proposed mechanism for it to suddenly start deriving all of biology from first principles?
I guess maybe he thinks all of biology is "in" the DNA and it's just a matter of simulating the 'compilation' process with enough fidelity to have a 100% accurate understanding of biology, but that just reveals how little he actually understands the field. Like, come on dude, that's such a common tech nerd misunderstanding of biology that xkcd made fun of it, get better material
"We are told that technology is helping redistribute wealth from the common people to a small subset of extremely rich men. But, as an extremely rich man, I don't really understand why this is a bad thing? Technology seems pretty cool to me!"
since we both have the High IQ feat you should be agreeing with me, after all we share the same privileged access to absolute truth. That we aren’t must mean you are unaligned/need to be further cleansed of thetans.
They have to agree, it's mathematically proven by Aumann's Agreement Theorem!
This is good! Though, he neglects to mention the group of people (including myself) who have yet to be sold on ai's usefulness at all (all critics of practical AI harms are lumped under 'reformers' implying they still see it as valuable but just currently misguided.)
Like, ok, so what if China develops it first? Now they can... generate more convincing spam, write software slightly faster with more bugs, and starve all their artists to death? ... Oh no, we'd better hurry up and compete with that!
I feel like such a hipster. "I hated them before it was cool!"