Comments on: No Physical Substrate, No Problem http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/04/07/no-physical-substrate-no-problem/ In a mad world, all blogging is psychiatry blogging Sat, 25 Jul 2015 01:56:58 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.3 By: Eluvatar http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/04/07/no-physical-substrate-no-problem/#comment-201504 Tue, 05 May 2015 02:38:35 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=3605#comment-201504 I find Friendship is Optimal significantly spookier than Eliezer Yudkowski.

It may be relevant to your thinking, as well.

Report comment

]]> By: Eluvatar http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/04/07/no-physical-substrate-no-problem/#comment-201503 Tue, 05 May 2015 02:08:59 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=3605#comment-201503 What about Consequentialists?

(What about Scott?)

Report comment

]]> By: Houshalter comments on “New York judge grants writ of habeus corpus to two chimpanzees” | Exploding Ads http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/04/07/no-physical-substrate-no-problem/#comment-199112 Wed, 22 Apr 2015 05:35:23 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=3605#comment-199112 […] See the interesting essay No Physical Substrate, No Problem: http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/04/07/no-physical-substrate-n… […]

Report comment

]]> By: nightskyradio http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/04/07/no-physical-substrate-no-problem/#comment-198955 Tue, 21 Apr 2015 20:20:47 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=3605#comment-198955 Perhaps the AI already exists and is secretly fanning resistance to building more AIs.

Report comment

]]> By: Citizensearth http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/04/07/no-physical-substrate-no-problem/#comment-198283 Sat, 18 Apr 2015 12:38:42 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=3605#comment-198283 > Well to hell with you too, buddy!

I’m not sure why you’re taking my comment, directed to Scott, as personal attack on you? Disagreement shouldn’t look like insult, not if we’re committed to giving all ideas a fair hearing.

I can’t speak for others, but my personal perception of AI risk scenarios doesn’t include any learning based on information the AGI doesn’t have or can’t create. Why? Because as best I can see current efforts in the field indicate it’s more likely we’ll actually be deliberately shovelling huge amounts (more than a single human could ever review) of info down its throat in an effort to get it to do something useful.

Report comment

]]> By: Lightning Round – 2015/04/15 | Free Northerner http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/04/07/no-physical-substrate-no-problem/#comment-197695 Wed, 15 Apr 2015 05:01:53 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=3605#comment-197695 […] How a malevolent AI could take over. […]

Report comment

]]> By: loki http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/04/07/no-physical-substrate-no-problem/#comment-197428 Tue, 14 Apr 2015 14:08:32 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=3605#comment-197428 Yeah, I mean I try to stay away from either side of the conversation re: EY is our Guru/Saviour vs EY is a pompous cult leader, but this whole thing does look like a transparent grab for attention which doesn’t even (unlike, say, PETA’s stunts) have the gonads to admit that it is totally a stunt to get attention for a cause.

As someone cautiously approaching EY-flavour rationalism and feeling, up to that point, really quite intrigued and drawn in, it was the turning point that led to the current state of not using terms like ‘rationalist’ and ‘aspiring rationalist’ as self-descriptors on the internet because that’s not the sort of association I’m going for.

Report comment

]]> By: loki http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/04/07/no-physical-substrate-no-problem/#comment-197407 Tue, 14 Apr 2015 13:27:59 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=3605#comment-197407 It’s the internet? We don’t know he lost the money, or that the game happened and wasn’t concocted by the two of them. In fact, it’s the internet, we don’t *know* the person posting under the same of EY’s opponent was really that person.

Report comment

]]> By: vV_Vv http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/04/07/no-physical-substrate-no-problem/#comment-197207 Mon, 13 Apr 2015 04:47:51 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=3605#comment-197207 I’m pretty sure that the author of the linked article is misinterpreting Aristotle.

If I understand correctly, Aristotle held that “universals” did not exist at ontological level separately from their instances. This is in sharp contrast with the “ideals” of his teacher Plato and it is probably closer to modern reductionist epistemology.

The “universals” the author of the article is referring to look a lot more like the Platonic ideals rather the Aristotelean universals.

Report comment

]]> By: vV_Vv http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/04/07/no-physical-substrate-no-problem/#comment-197205 Mon, 13 Apr 2015 04:19:44 +0000 http://slatestarcodex.com/?p=3605#comment-197205 Maybe AI won’t have a consciousness/soul/vis vitalis/prana/qi/whatever, but if it as good as we are or better than we are at the things we do, then it will have significant social, economic and possibly ecological consequences.

Debating about the ontological status of human mind may be an interesting intellectual exercise, but as far as the discussion about AI feasibility and impact is concerned, it is a red herring.

Report comment

]]>