I get it—calling AGI a conspiracy isn’t a perfect analogy. It will also piss a lot of people off [emp mine].
No need to oversell it, I already was onboard on the 'it is a conspiracy' bit.
And you know he has done some research when he brings up Ben Goertzel. (Who last I checked now really believes in parapsychology)
Goertzel did some work with Peter Thiel
Drink!
Somebody got fed up they were only evaluated on "%of people who adopted AI". This feels very malicious compliance to me.
There is also the whole 'nits make lice' sort of stuff which was used to justify killing Native Americans (ow look, a group who also has not homeland to return to, which Scott, an American, forgot about). And basically any sort of genocide ever runs on this sort of 'I have to kill their babies because they might kill mine' shit logic.
Even Robocop got that you should not shoot through hostages when the bad guy takes a hostage. (Cw: attempted sexual abuse: https://youtu.be/taWMwB1mLhc)
Wait, the dusting attack problem has not been fixed?
"You hate AI art? Well name all real paintings!" the blog post.
Also talking about the urinal "Art, it seems, is most meaningful when it challenges our very concept of what art is." No that was in 1917. Pretty sure that nowadays 'what is art even?' art is quite overdone and boring.
Puts down Snow Crash.
Ah look the torment nexus.
As superpredicted here by us, the superpredictors.
'lol you did more research than I did for my whole company'
I'm a fan of extreme metal, and I know you cannot just hide behind 'im just singing a song' since I was in my teens (or earlier). I know people often make bad arguments just because they are reaching for anything to try and defend somebody they like/agree with ideologically but this is super duper weak and embarrassing.
Also, apparently it doesn't hold up in court. People have gotten in trouble for 'in minecraft' statements, and at least in the Netherlands saying 'it means all cats are beautiful' still gets you fined for an acab reference to a cop. These are not computer systems where you can go 'I mean B not A beep boop' and the problem disappears in a puff of logic.
I did 80 hours of study on this, and turns out that the children had only negative QALYs (from now on NQALYs), and the reduction of poor parents surplus children actually increased the total QALYs (and that is not even counting the benefits you get from using the children), therefore in this essay I will...
It is funny, some of them are so afraid of paperclip generators while they don't realize that they themselves can easily be made to believe horrible things if you just back it up with enough stats, papers and contrarian blog posts.
But I knew the task would be tricky
Is it just me or isn't this not even that tricky (just a bit of work, so I agree with him on the free evening thing, esp when you are a bit rusty)? Anyway, note how he does give a timeframe for doing this himself (an evening) but doesn't mention how long he worked on the chatgpt stuff, nor does he mention if he succeeded at his project at all
E: anyway what he needs is an editor.
Drink!