LessWrong 2.0 Reader

Yeah maybe. I tried to write what I think is true, but from the perspective of someone with different values. If I included things I didn't think were true then that feels like I'm mocking Trump supporters and I don't want to do that. For example: "The democrats are letting in immigrants who are eating cats and dogs, people's pets. Trump would stop this". Obviously it's a belief held by MAGAs, and if it was true then it's a good argument to vote for Trump. But I don't think it's true, and therefore it's a very bad argument.

Thanks @TomasD [LW · GW], that's interesting! I agree - most words in my random list seem like random "objects/things/organisms" so there might be some conditioning going on there. Going over your code to see if there's something else that's different.

It's set in about 1995...

God exists because the most reasonable take is the Solomonoff Prior. 

A funny consequence of that is that Intelligent Design will have a fairly large weight in the Solomonoff prior. Indeed the simulation argument can be seen as a version of Intelligent Design. 

The Abrahamic God hypothesis is still substantially downweighted because it seems to involve many contigent bits - i.e noisy random bits that can't be compressed. The Solomonoff prior therefore has to downweight them. 

NotebookLM is able to generate a good podcast from this post. There are some bugs though.

One feature of every lesswrong Petrov day ritual is the understanding that the people on the other side of the button have basically similar goals and reasoning processes, especially when aggregated into a group. I wonder if the mods at /r/sneerclub would be interested in a Petrov day collaboration in the future.

But it's also relevant that we're not asking the superintelligence to grant a random wish, we're asking it for the right to keep something we already have. This seems more easily granted than the random wish, since it doesn't imply he has to give random amounts of money to everyone.

My preferred analogy would be:

You founded a company that was making $77/year. Bernard launched a hostile takeover, took over the company, then expanded it to make $170 billion/year. You ask him to keep paying you the $77/year as a pension, so that you don't starve to death.

This seems like a very sympathetic request, such that I expect the real, human Bernard would grant it. I agree this doesn't necessarily generalize to superintelligences, but that's Zack's point - Eliezer should choose a different example.

I doubt it matters much. 

If Xi Jinping would care enough then they will build A(G)I. 

China has 1,4 billion people.The Chinese economy is 18 trillion dollars per annum. What is a 1,10,100, even a 1000 billion dollar training run on that kind of industrial might? The stickler is political will not economic possibility. 

The only real question is whether Western controls on chip import/exports is working. It seems that China is about 10 years behind on Western chip manufactures - but catching up quickly. 

In general I think it's often helpful to ignore mood afilliatiated stories about this or that country doing well or not well. Focus on the actual numbers*. In many cases the narrative is about an effect that is <1% of the economy. That's not going to matter. 

*well caveat that a Chinese GDP statistics are maybe probably somewhat fake. e.g. satelite light photos etc. 

The things you mentioned were probably all net positive, they just had some negative consequences as well. If you want to drive the far-ish future in a particular direction you’ve just got to accept that you’ll never know for sure that you’re doing a good job.

"Winning The democratic party cares about laws and democratic norms. Trump cares about winning."

I doubt that you passed the IIT. I presume MAGA republicans would say that they're the ones that care about Freedom and Democracy while the democrats are the two-faced cronies of the Deep State.