LessWrong 2.0 Reader

Has it become harder to link to comments in lesswrong? I feel like if it used to be a part of the comment's menu items that I could copy a link to the comment, and I can't seem to find this anymore.

I disagree. The government can be said to definitively "know" something if the Eye of Sauron turns its gaze upon that thing [LW(p) · GW(p)].

(For reference, I understood that and my cutting language [LW(p) · GW(p)] wasn't targeted at you.)

Figuring out how to make sense of both predictive lenses together—human design and selection pressure—would be wise.

So I generally agree, but would maybe go farther on your human design point. It seems to me that"do[ing] the right things" (which enable AGI trajectories to be completely up to us) is so completely unrealistic (eg halting all intra and international AGI competition) that it'd be better for us to focus our attention on futures where human design and selection pressures interact.

Edited title to make it more clear this is a link post and that I don’t necessarily endorse the title.

I don't think it's accurate to model breakdowns as a linear function of journeys or train-miles unless irregular effects like extreme weather are a negligible fraction of breakdowns.

"The government" is too large, diffuse, and incoherent of a collective entity to be straightforwardly said to know or not know anything more complicated on most topics than a few headlines. I am certain there are individuals and teams and maybe agencies within the government that understand, and others that are so far from understanding they wouldn't know where to begin learning.

"10x engineers" are a thing, and if we assume they're high-agency people always looking to streamline and improve their workflows, we should expect them to be precisely the people who get a further 10x boost from LLMs. Have you observed any specific people suddenly becoming 10x more prolific?

In addition to the objection from Archimedes, another reason this is unlikely to be true is that 10x coders are often much more productive than other engineers because they've heavily optimized around solving for specific problems or skills that other engineers are bottlenecked by, and most of those optimizations don't readily admit of having an LLM suddenly inserted into the loop.

Why not both?

Human design will determine the course of AGI development, and if we do the right things then whether it goes well is fully and completely up to us. Naturally at the moment we don't know what the right things are or even how to find them.

If we don't do the right things (as seems likely), then the kinds of AGI which survive will be the kind which evolve to survive. That's still largely up to us at first, but increasingly less up to us.

How does the falling price factor into an investor's decision to enter the market? Should they wait for batteries to get even cheaper, or should they invest immediately and hope the arbitrage rates hold up long enough to provide a good return on investment? The longer the payback period, the more these dynamics matter.