LessWrong 2.0 Reader

we completely dominate dogs. society treat them well because enough humans love dogs.

I do think that cooperation between people is the origin of religion, and its moral rulesets which create tiny little societies that can hunt stags. 

I definitely think that if I was not conscious then I would not coherently want things. But that conscious minds are the only things that can truly care, does not mean that conscious minds are the only things we should terminally care about.

The close circle composition isn't enough to justify Singerian altruism from egoist assumptions, because of the value falloff. With each degree of connection, I love the stranger less.

I didn't use the word "ethics" in my comment, so are you making a definitional statement, to distinguish between [universal value system] and [subjective value system] or just authoritatively saying that I'm wrong?

Are you claiming moral realism? I don't really believe that. If "ethics" is global, why should I care about "ethics"? Sorry if that sounds callous, I do actually care about the world, just trying to pin down what you mean.

I suspect the real reason is stopping competitors fine-tuning on o1's CoT, which they also come right out and say:

Therefore, after weighing multiple factors including user experience, competitive advantage, and the option to pursue the chain of thought monitoring

What signal do we get from DeepSeek continuing to publish?

the number one spontaneous conversation is "what are you working on" or "what have you done so far", which forces you to re-explain what you're doing & the reasons for doing it to a skeptical & ignorant audience

I'm very curious if others also find this to be the biggest value-contributor amongst spontaneous conversations. (Also, more generally, I'm curious what kinds of spontaneous conversations people are getting so much value out of.)

Levi da.

I'm here to see if I can help.

I heard a few things about Elizier Yudkowsky. Saw a few LW articles while looking for previous research on my work with AI psychological influence. There isn't any so I signed up to contribute.

If you know my name, you probably know why that's a good idea. If you don't, it would be a waste of time for me to try to explain. You'd have to see for yourself. It's a whole ass rabbit hole.

Whether or not it would happen by default, this would be the single most useful LW feature for me. I'm often really unsure whether a post will get enough attention to be worth making it a longform, and sometimes even post shortforms like "comment if you want this to be a longform".

Feedback loops I think are the principle bottleneck in my skill development, aside from the fact that if you're a notice you don't even know what you should be noticing (even if you have enough awareness to be cognizant of all signs and outputs of an act).

To give an example, I'm currently trying to learn how to generate client leads through video content for Instagram. Unless someone actually tells me about a video they liked and what they liked about it, figuring out how to please the algorithm to generate more engagement is hard. The only thing that "works" - tagging other people. Nothing about the type of content, the framing of the shots, the subject matter, the audio... nope... just whether or not one or more other Instagram accounts are tagged in it. (Of course since the end objective is - 'get commissioned' perhaps optimizing for Instagram engagement is not even the thing I should be optimizing at all... how would I know?)
Feedback loops are hard. A desirbale metaskill to have would be developing tight feedback loops. 

It's been a while since I've read Plato's Republic, but isn't the Myth of Er just a abstraction of the way people make decision based on (perceived) justice and injustice in their everyday life? Just in the same way that Socrates says it is easier to read large print than small print, so he scales up justice from an individual to the titular Kallipolis, so too the day to day determinism of choices motivated by what we consider is 'fair' or 'just' is easier seen if multiplied over endless cycles of lives, than days and nights.

Is it possible that Plato was saying that day to day we experience this homeostatic mechanism? (if you are rational enough to observe the patterns of how your choices affect your personal circumstances?).

An example from the Republic itself: if I remember correctly the entire dialogue starts because Socrates is in effect kidnapped after the end of a festival because his interlocutors find him so darn entertaining. This would appear to be unjust - but not unexpected because he is Socrates which he has this reputation for being engaging and wise even if it is not the 'right' or 'just' way to treat him. How then should he behave in future, knowing that this is the potential cost of his social behavior? And the Myth of Er says that Odysseus kept to himself, sought neither virtue nor tyranny. That's probably the wrong reading. It's been a while since I've read it.