News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Rationality: From AI to Zombies by zyxley on Friday March 20, 2015 @05:00PM (#9240665)
> you do not just publicly publish information hazards that might be real

But... for "might be real" to be valid at all, you have to buy into the Roko's basilisk concept in the first place.

If you don't, there's nothing to get upset about.

Re:Rationality: From AI to Zombies by kbenson on Friday March 20, 2015 @06:22PM (#9241006)
That's like saying you shouldn't be mad at someone who attempted to murder you because they failed. There's a reason we have a crime called "attempted murder". You may find the wikipedia article on "Inchoate offense" interesting, specifically the section on Impossibility[1].

1: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inchoate_offense#Impossibility

Re:Rationality: From AI to Zombies by ciphergoth on Saturday March 21, 2015 @10:54AM (#9242871)
If I learned that a co-worker believed that nuts were invariably fatal to me and gone on to hide some in my food, the nuts would do me no harm but I would still take the whole incident seriously.
Re:Rationality: From AI to Zombies by convexfunction on Friday March 20, 2015 @08:51PM (#9241482)
I meant "might be real" according to generic-you in that statement. Someone being wrong doesn't make information hazards in general disappear.