swlabr

imagine being “entertained” by an AI stand-up - FOREVER

This is the brain simulation future that rationalists want!

Summary point 5 is fun.

I conclude that the rate of criminal behavior amongst major philanthropists is high

Great!

which means that we should not expect altruism to substantially lower the risks compared to that of the general population,

Ok, not super clear what “the risks” are here. One interpretation is that they are saying “just because someone donates money doesn’t mean they aren’t a criminal”, which is correct. But it’s not clear! Anyway.

and that negative impacts to EA’s public perception may occur independently of whether our donors actually commit crimes (e.g. because even noncriminal billionaires have a negative public image).

So close! Why do “noncriminal” billionaires have a negative public image? It’s almost as if legality isn’t the decider of morality!

Perhaps one day EAs will gain class consciousness and a sense of morality beyond an uncritical elision of ethics via utilitarianism; we aren’t there yet.

I just curl pages and render it all in my head. It's easy with my 10 Morbillion IQ

Oh hey it’s that episode of black mirror with the AI clone of a dead guy mixed with… that other black mirror episode where a digital shock-jock becomes a joke candidate in a political race. The moral of both stories essentially being “hey don’t do this, it’s messed up”. Don’t create the Torment Avatar etc.

Ok ok, now imagine being an AI ghostwriter for one of those AI girlfriend apps.

I didn’t realise they added a laugh track. That’s fucking sad

Oh, that sucks. That brings to mind an episode of the “mystery show” podcast where someone had a lunchbox with art based on the old sitcom “Welcome back, Kotter” that depicted some scene that seemed incongruous. The episode then went into a deep dive about the show, the show’s creator, the lunchbox company, associates of the now/then-deceased artist that designed the lunchbox, and many others, all to try and justify the existence of that seemingly incorrect design.

While I doubt that any significant number of people would ever investigate the design of merchandising like the above, it is nice to think about the stories behind objects. In the quest to make things cheaper to create, we lose stories like this, and the world gets a bit darker.

Amazing!

Edit: pursuant to @[email protected]‘s commentary: I didn’t read their literature particularly critically. It would be great if artists had a way to deter AI thievery, and this product looked like it might be that. But I guess it’s not. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Given the context, the runway probably begins with quoting some scientific racism statistics around IQ or crime rates or something.

to be read in the low bit cadence of SF2 Guile “ai doom!”

It’s not a huge surprise that these AI models that indiscriminately inhale a bunch of ill-gotten inputs are prone to poisoning. Fingers crossed that it makes the number go down!

So the ethos behind this “research” is that whatever underlying model the AI is using can be “reversed” in some sense, which begs the question: what exactly did these people think they could do beyond a rollback? That they could beg the AI to stop being mean or something?

They were probably inspired by the blanka creation scene from the street fighter movie where they brainwash some guy by showing him video clips of bad stuff and then switch it to showing good stuff.

my reference point for this kind of extension is the one that changes “social justice” and “sjw” with “skeleton” and “skeleton warrior.” For example:

“sjws are taking over X” -> “skeleton warriors are taking over X”

Actually now that I’m typing this I hope there’s a good one for “woke”.