reducesuffering

Yes, but nobody should be surprised when large amounts of intelligence results in changes to this process in support of the obvious end goal! Lesswrong.com discussions about AI were predicting this behavior a decade ago, before the transition from machine learning to the Attention paper and LLM's. The intelligence process will change but the world's premier capital and human intelligence have been laser focused on this and the trajectory has been crystal clear for those paying attention to second order effects and not the immediate here-and-now... It's quite astonishing how much discussion on HN is about present LLM capabilities being the limit of AGI and immediately proven wrong within 6 months.

All this is, understandably, frustrating and confusing for anyone trying to understand just how scared to be."

Meanwhile it links to an article stating: "The closest thing to a public debate about the existential threat of AI is surveys of AI researchers. The most recent, published last week, asked 1,580 researchers what probability they put on AI causing human extinction — or a permanent, severe loss of human control, which is not the same outcome. The median was about 10%, up from 5% two years ago. The middle half of the responses ran from 1% to 25%, and 12% said zero."

Personally if half of AI researchers have 1-25% chance all humans being massacred or having zero agency over our lives, and only 12% of them think there's no chance, I would be very worried!

There are a gargantuan number of extremely intelligent AI researchers, Turing Award winners, and the lab CEOs saying the same thing. They are the ones closest to understanding the technology.

Where there’s smoke there’s fire.

The foams are getting better, the shoes lighter, they are more cushioned and more responsive in general. Especially the ASICS.

I was convinced by this for a full 30 seconds before I realized there are millions of advertisements for the state lotteries. They aren't just regulating a market that will exist with or without the state, they are actively promoting and encouraging it

Amongst acquaintances I see low carb adherents. I wonder why they are always the ones woefully less fit than the serious athlete acquaintances. Amongst serious athletes there is no low carb proselytizing lol.

For sure it can help people who don't exercise and thus don't use much carbs in the first place. But that is far from ideal health, and thus the ideal diet.

https://www.lesswrong.com/w/orthogonality-thesis

https://www.lesswrong.com/w/instrumental-convergence

OpenAI is going to implode soon. They would have to raise an unfathomable amount of money, it's literally never been done and is so much it won't happen. That's why they're going to collapse.

He could have predicted that OpenAI would raise an unprecedented amount of money and are not going to collapse. He clearly believed differently.

[0] https://arxiv.org/abs/1706.03741

https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/uMQ3cqWDPHhjtiesc/agi-ruin-a...

A book if you will: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_Anyone_Builds_It,_Everyone_...

"Development of superhuman machine intelligence (SMI) is probably the greatest threat to the continued existence of humanity. There are other threats that I think are more certain to happen (for example, an engineered virus with a long incubation period and a high mortality rate) but are unlikely to destroy every human in the universe in the way that SMI could." - Sam Altman

"If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_Anyone_Builds_It,_Everyone_...

Frontier labs are also reinvesting their tens of billions of revenue back into infra scaleout, sounds like Amazon.

If 2 of 3 were like this, and Azure numbers were never split out, want to take a guess what the economics of the third was like too?