dtujmer

haha Uranus

A fipple, two gonzies, a stib, borquet and tinch, and I think I also see a couple of goffels

This blog post may be useful, it's a summary of learning strategies: https://becomingoverhuman.wordpress.com/2018/11/30/how-i-lea...

"The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death."

Well, maybe not the last one, but still an important one. Nick Bostrom has a great story describing the underlying philosophy in the fight against aging:

https://nickbostrom.com/fable/dragon.html

And here it is in video form as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZYNADOHhVY

"Once you've wrestled, everything else in life is easy."

The entire experience, from the first days when I got triangled by girls half my size (choking my ego as much as choking my body), to competition days, with pressure passers and crazy leglock guys... It absolutely changed me - for the better.

I think Sam Harris put it like this: for free will, it doesn't even matter if reality is deterministic or random because the determinism or randomness are found at the quantum level, many levels "below" neurological free will.

Let's say we have Universe 1 (deterministic) and Universe 2 (random). You face a choice - raise your left hand or your right hand. In U1, if you went back in time several times, you would always pick the same hand because the configuration of matter in the universe would "require" that the next step, globally, is you raising that same hand. In U2, if you went back in time, there could be some variance - maybe you'd pick the other hand 50% of the time - but this variance would happen on a quantum level and only manifest neurologically/physically. I still see no possibility of the classical idea of free will there.

That's a good strategy. What if the answer is no to both questions?

As I understand it, AI ethical principles relate to the development of a superintelligence. Talking about unethical usage of narrow AI is like talking about the unethical usage of any other tool - there is no significant difference.

The "true" AI ethical question is related to ensuring that the team that develops the AI is aware of AI alignment efforts and has a "security mindset" (meaning: don't just try stuff and repair the damage if something happens - ensure in advance, with mathematical proof, that a damaging thing won't happen). This is important because in a catastrophic superintelligent AI scenario, the damage is irreparable (e.g. all humanity dies in 12 hours).

For a good intro to these topics, Life 3.0 by Max Tegmark is a good resource. Superintelligence by Nick Bostrom as well.

For a shorter read, see this blog post: https://waitbutwhy.com/2015/01/artificial-intelligence-revol...

For general information about AI ethical principles, see FHI's website, they have publications there that you could also read: https://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/governance-ai-program/

People get upset about relatively unimportant things. I'm pretty sure sexism exists and is bad, but this is just... not it. It's a dumb meme, that's all.

Wow. This is honestly the best analogy I've ever seen. I still think that some particular behaviors are generally good and should be emulated (like e.g. exercise) - but even there you'll find exceptions. But taking CEO quirks and designing lives so that they include them... That's just guessing the teacher's password (https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/NMoLJuDJEms7Ku9XS/guessing-t...).

Why iPhone instead of Android?

Don't know if this is helpful, but Derek Sivers has a giant review page of all the books he has read. Maybe wits.io competes with this by better reviews, maybe not. In any case, I'm putting this here for all interested parties: https://sivers.org/book

I don't know if it is necessarily signalling, but I too have a dislike for this type of "reading". I think it mostly depends on the book itself - for example, you probably won't get a lot from a 15-minute summary of Gödel, Escher, Bach by Douglas Hofstadter, but maybe you'll get like 70% from a book like Nudge by Sunstein and Thaler.