Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Yeah... (Score 1) 79

If we got rid of 90 percent of humanity, or returned to hunter gatherer ways, we wouldn't need to worry about airplanes or houses or overeating.

Or if, you know, we developed ways to generate and use that don't produce carbon dioxide emissions, and ways to capture CO2 from the atmosphere and sequester it, then we wouldn't have to slaughter billions and return to a subsistence lifestyle.

Can we maybe try a carbon tax for a couple of decades first? We can always do the murdering later. Given the birthrate trends, if we wait a century the population will crash without doing anything.

Comment Re:That desperate for press leading into IPOs? (Score 1) 49

I think you have a very generous view behind the true motives of these disclosures. The "let's do it safely" train left about 2 years ago.

Until the AIs have actually taken control there's still room to try to figure out how to align them with humanity. I suspect we are running out of room, though. Fast.

Comment Re:Who could have seen that coming? (Score 1) 66

Actual quote was "by 2025, AI will allow developers to complete a week’s worth of work in four days".

That quote was in the article, but the article title was about a four-day work week. Kamelia Aryafar, the author, clearly thought (correctly) that AI would allow engineers to get a week's worth of work done in less than a week and then thought (incorrectly) that this would mean developers would respond by ending their week as soon as they had done that.

What actually happens, of course, is that if you can get done in one day what used to take five, you now do five weeks' worth of work every week.

Fundamentally, productivity isn't the constraint on working hours. If that were true, Keynes' expectation that we'd be working 15-hour weeks would be true. What constrains working hours is the limits of human ability to remain attentive and focused and the demands of human life, and those constraints turn out to be roughly 40 hours per week. A little more or less than that depending on the person and on the nature of the work.

Increasing productivity has never really changed working hours, it just increases productivity, which makes us all wealthier. Yes, all of us, including the workers -- if you believe all of the gains accrue only to the bosses or owners of capital you really need to learn more about what life was like in past decades and centuries.

Comment Re:That desperate for press leading into IPOs? (Score 2) 49

You sound like an idiot

The things AleRunner mentioned are plausible outcomes of misaligned artificial superintelligence, and the research in question is trying to prevent those outcomes. If you have good arguments as to why those outcomes are implausible, a lot of people would like to hear them -- including the AI companies and their safety researchers.

Comment Re:That desperate for press leading into IPOs? (Score 1) 49

These daily "weird flexes" from the frontier AI companies are getting tiresome.

You misunderstand the purpose of this research, and the reason for publishing it. The research is not about "flexing", it's about safety, trying to understand the risks that we may be facing as the agent capabilities increase. AGI or not AGI is actually irrelevant here. What the researchers are trying to understand is what the agents will do when they face apparent opposition.

The cooperative results are great, because we think that's what we'd like highly-capable agents to do, to look for reasoned, peaceful resolutions. What we don't want them to do is to become aggressive, or to fail to step back and look at the larger situation.

And the reason for publishing it is to enable other researchers to see it and build on it, quickly, because everyone working on this stuff understands that it could pose an existential risk to humans. Find and talk to some people who work on AI research; they all worry about this. Many of them actually believe that we'd be better off if everyone stopped the research, or at least slowed it down significantly, but everyone knows that's never going to happen. So, their best option is to create the most capable and best-aligned AI, as quickly as possible. It needs to be well-aligned so it doesn't pose a threat to human existence. It needs to be capable so it can protect us from badly-aligned AI.

Get on with the IPOs already so we don't have to read these stories every day.

The IPOs won't stop the research, nor the publication. If you're not interested in it, just don't read it.

Comment Re:Air Conditioners save lives (Score 2) 143

There is a strange movement in Europe against Air Conditioners.

Yes. But a large part of that is the difficulty in retrofitting it to their older buildings. In the USA, we have a large installed base of forced air heating. Which can be upgraded to a heat pump. Also, we (USA) have more stand alone single family dwellings. So remodeling or even piping in split systems is easier. And with a heat pump, you not only get more efficient heat, but A/C as well.

hate and refuse to promote air conditioners often use refrigerators and freezers in the same homes.

Completely different applications. Refrigerators/freezers are self contained and much smaller than an entire house. And they prevent food spoilage. A much more serious problem than hot weather.

Slashdot Top Deals

"The Computer made me do it."

Working...