I find any regulation as totally premature. We are not training IA for anything close to General Intelligence. We are still training brain tissue, not animals.
[Quick meta comment to try to influence forum norms]
This comment was at −5 karma when I saw it, and hidden.
I disagree with Arturo’s comment and disagree voted to indicate this disagreement. I also upvoted his the karma on his comment because I appreciated that he engaged with the post to express his views and that he posted something on the forum to explain those views.
I’d like other people to do something similar. I think that we should upvote people for expressing good faith disagreement and make an effort to explain that disagreement. Otherwise, the forum will become a complete echo chamber where we all just agree with each other.
I also think that we should try particularly hard to engage with new people in the community who express reasonable disagreement. Getting lots of anonymous downvotes without useful insights generally discourage engagements in most situations and I don’t think that this is what we want.
Of course. But that doesn’t really apply to Arturo’s comment, which expresses an attitude but doesn’t explain that attitude at all. So Arturo’s comment
can’t be useful to others and
is impossible to engage with, which is why nobody has replied to Arturo on the object-level.
I want less unhelpful-unexplained-attitude-expressing on the Forum.
Arturo, I wish you would explain your beliefs more so we can figure out the truth together.
He linked to his post in the comment. I presume that he believes that it explains why he disagrees. I’d consider that contribution to be deserving of not getting downvoted, but I see where you are coming from.
With that said, if he said, “I think we need regulation” and offered two lines of related thoughts and the same link, would people have downvoted his comment for not being useful and being impossible to engage with? Probably not, I suspect.
Anyway, I may be wrong in this case, but I still think that we probably shouldn’t be so quick to downvote comments like this (or at least a bit better). Especially for new community members.
I see a lot of stuff on the forum get no comments at all which seems worse than getting a few comments with opinions.
I often see low effort disagreeing comments on a post get downvoted but similarly low effort agreeable comment (e.g., this sounds great) get upvoted.
I am also influenced by other factors. Discussions I have had and seen where people I know who have been involved in EA for years said that they don’t like using the forum because it is too negative or because they don’t get any engagement on what write.
The expectation that lots of lurkers on the forum don’t feel comfortable sharing quick thoughts or disagreements because they could get downvotes.
My experiences writing posts that almost no-one commented on where I would have welcomed a 2-minute opinion comment made without arguments or a supposedly supporting link.
But of course other people might disagree with all of that or see different trade-offs etc.
I have written two recent posts describing my position. In the first I argued that nuclear war plus our primitive social systems, imply we live in an age of acute existential risk, and the substitution of our flawed governance by AI based government is our chance of survival.
In the second one, I argue that given the kind of specialized AI we are training so far, existential risk from AI is still negligible, and regulation would be premature.
You can comment on the posts themselves, or you can comment both posts here.
I find any regulation as totally premature. We are not training IA for anything close to General Intelligence. We are still training brain tissue, not animals.
https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/uHeeE5d96TKowTzjA/world-and-mind-in-artificial-intelligence-arguments-against
[Quick meta comment to try to influence forum norms]
This comment was at −5 karma when I saw it, and hidden.
I disagree with Arturo’s comment and disagree voted to indicate this disagreement. I also upvoted his the karma on his comment because I appreciated that he engaged with the post to express his views and that he posted something on the forum to explain those views.
I’d like other people to do something similar. I think that we should upvote people for expressing good faith disagreement and make an effort to explain that disagreement. Otherwise, the forum will become a complete echo chamber where we all just agree with each other.
I also think that we should try particularly hard to engage with new people in the community who express reasonable disagreement. Getting lots of anonymous downvotes without useful insights generally discourage engagements in most situations and I don’t think that this is what we want.
Of course. But that doesn’t really apply to Arturo’s comment, which expresses an attitude but doesn’t explain that attitude at all. So Arturo’s comment
can’t be useful to others and
is impossible to engage with, which is why nobody has replied to Arturo on the object-level.
I want less unhelpful-unexplained-attitude-expressing on the Forum.
Arturo, I wish you would explain your beliefs more so we can figure out the truth together.
He linked to his post in the comment. I presume that he believes that it explains why he disagrees. I’d consider that contribution to be deserving of not getting downvoted, but I see where you are coming from.
With that said, if he said, “I think we need regulation” and offered two lines of related thoughts and the same link, would people have downvoted his comment for not being useful and being impossible to engage with? Probably not, I suspect.
Anyway, I may be wrong in this case, but I still think that we probably shouldn’t be so quick to downvote comments like this (or at least a bit better). Especially for new community members.
I see a lot of stuff on the forum get no comments at all which seems worse than getting a few comments with opinions.
I often see low effort disagreeing comments on a post get downvoted but similarly low effort agreeable comment (e.g., this sounds great) get upvoted.
I am also influenced by other factors. Discussions I have had and seen where people I know who have been involved in EA for years said that they don’t like using the forum because it is too negative or because they don’t get any engagement on what write.
The expectation that lots of lurkers on the forum don’t feel comfortable sharing quick thoughts or disagreements because they could get downvotes.
My experiences writing posts that almost no-one commented on where I would have welcomed a 2-minute opinion comment made without arguments or a supposedly supporting link.
But of course other people might disagree with all of that or see different trade-offs etc.
I have written two recent posts describing my position. In the first I argued that nuclear war plus our primitive social systems, imply we live in an age of acute existential risk, and the substitution of our flawed governance by AI based government is our chance of survival.
In the second one, I argue that given the kind of specialized AI we are training so far, existential risk from AI is still negligible, and regulation would be premature.
You can comment on the posts themselves, or you can comment both posts here.