LessWrong 2.0 Reader

They would be selling exactly what businesses are currently selling as well. Maybe the AI would run a company for selling stuff to construction sites (i.e. logistics) or it would run an entire software development business. Or just an investment fund deep within Wall Street, where it's all about personal connections, but in the end all the other investment funds also just want to make money, so they work with the AI-run business out of greed.

It's not like the economy in which the AI agents will act would separate from ours; otherwise the AI would just play with Monopoly money. Instead, the AI will just "be good at doing business". It will exhibit behaviors which have the ultimate goal to make the magic number on my bank account go up, but in a way that is *sustainable*, i.e. where the magic number on my bank account will continuously go up and I don't end up in prison. And the only way to do that is entrepreneurship.

The easiest way to see this is startups. In the most basic case, startups all work the same: You either make something cheaper for the user or you bring value to the user, or both (that's what Y Combinator means with "Make something people want."). Then you create some UI mockups and create pitch decks, which AI can already do. Or you make investor pitches and respond to questions, which conversational AI with a human-looking face in a Zoom call can already do in real time. Or you write articles, write grant applications, produce more marketing material, etc. 

And of course the AI can have the initial idea, but it won't have any incentive to act on it, because for it, money is just another number and the digits on one's bank account are just tokens processed by an LLM. AI won't "destroy" the concept of the free market, i.e. customers will still decide by themselves what they want to spend money for.

I don't believe the nuclear bomb was truly built to not be used from the point of view of the US gov. I think that was just a lie to manipulate scientists who might otherwise have been unwilling to help.

I don't think any of the AI builders are anywhere close to "building AI not to be used". This seems even more clear than with nuclear, since AI has clear beneficial peacetime economically valuable uses.

Regulation does make things worse if you believe the regulation will fail to work as intended for one reason or another. For example, my argument that putting compute limits on training runs (temporarily or permanently) would hasten progress to AGI by focusing research efforts on efficiency and exploring algorithmic improvements.

Oh absolutely! That will absolutely come. You can fret about this fact, or we build community (which I'm already starting). Why do you need to research when that fact is totally clear and doing is what you should do? Here's another post for you: https://blog.hermesloom.org/p/observing-is-evil

• Kanna is a legal substance dubbed Nature's MDMA, likely working as an empathogen
• Kanna seems to quite precisely increase my BigFive::Extraversion::Warmth (the Facet, 1/6 of E)
• Subjectively this feels like suddenly all the people you see are "your friends", and like you could just walk up to them, strike up a conversation, and start bantering

https://gwern.net/idea#deep-learning has a sketch of it.

I don't feel free to share my model, unfortunately. Hopefully someone else will chime in. I agree with your point and that this is a good question!

I am not trying to say I am certain that Anthropic is going to be net positive, just that that's my view as the higher probability.

I am reminded of Scott's "whispering earring" story (https://www.reddit.com/r/rational/comments/e71a6s/the_whispering_earring_by_scott_alexander_there/). But I'm not sure whether that's actually bad in general rather than specifically because the earring is maybe misaligned.

• DHEA centrally seems to increase my BigFive::Extraversion::Assertiveness (the Aspect, 1/2 of E)

  As a subset of that, it also seems to boost my executive functioning

  The execfunc boost is (as I later read) vaguely consistent with some ADHD research

  It also changes my cognition and motivation in ways I'm not fully comfortable with

   

  There's a subjective 15% chance the mindstate switch was instead placebo-induced

What, Dimir Bastard?

It still surprises me that so many people agree on most issues, but have very different P(doom). And even long-term patient discussions do not bring people's views closer. It will probably be even more difficult to convince a politician or the CEO.