Active AGI and/or FAI researchers

post by hankx7787 · 2012-01-07T03:08:46.687Z · LW · GW · Legacy · 14 comments

Contents

14 comments

I am curious in general about who here, if anyone, is actively researching the AGI and/or FAI problems directly in a full-time capacity (or soon will be). So if that's you, please say hello! Or if you know another website/mailing-list/etc this question would be more appropriate to ask, please let me know.

If you are interested in saying more about who you are and what you're doing, I've included some additional questions below. Feel free to provide as much or as little information as you'd like - but the more the better!


14 comments

Comments sorted by top scores.

comment by Stuart_Armstrong · 2012-01-07T10:11:16.277Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Currently working for the FHI, mainly on FAI-like problems. Got a paper coming out soon on Oracle AI (http://www.aleph.se/papers/oracleAI.pdf)

comment by lukeprog · 2012-01-07T16:06:41.911Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

See here for starters.

Replies from: None
comment by [deleted] · 2012-01-07T16:56:45.848Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

I just wanted to say thank you for all the cool websites you made/got SIAI to spend resources on! :)

Replies from: Grognor
comment by Grognor · 2012-01-08T02:48:09.878Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Also thank Lightwave for being the resources.

comment by Vladimir_Nesov · 2012-01-07T15:39:56.288Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

You won't get a lot of responses if you ask people to name themselves.

Replies from: Stuart_Armstrong
comment by Stuart_Armstrong · 2012-01-07T17:49:27.891Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Why, btw?

Replies from: Vladimir_Nesov
comment by Vladimir_Nesov · 2012-01-07T18:13:23.075Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Because all else equal, announcing that you're doing something impressive feels like a (small) status hit, so if nothing else moves people to overcome this trivial inconvenience (for example, recognizing that it actually isn't a status hit, or that the default behavior in a given context is to respond rather than stay silent, or if someone personally asked you), nothing gets done.

Replies from: MixedNuts, Stuart_Armstrong
comment by MixedNuts · 2012-01-07T18:22:25.726Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

announcing that you're doing something impressive feels like a (small) status hit

Something isn't right here. Do you mean it feels like a status grab - a status hit to others, avoided out of politeness? Or that people who do extremely impressive (as opposed to moderately impressive ones) things shouldn't need to announce it, so "I'm saving the world" is a status loss but "I'm learning Swahili" is a status gain?

Replies from: Kaj_Sotala, Vladimir_Nesov
comment by Kaj_Sotala · 2012-01-07T20:26:02.454Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

I interpreted this as meaning that needing to nominate yourself implies that nobody else cares enough about your work to name you as an example, meaning that you're not actually that important.

Replies from: Stuart_Armstrong
comment by Stuart_Armstrong · 2012-01-07T23:52:31.352Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Convoluted. But do you feel it's plausible?

Replies from: Kaj_Sotala
comment by Kaj_Sotala · 2012-01-08T07:57:12.054Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

I know I've felt that way every now and then, though on those occasions the reason has also been clear to me. I'm not sure if it's equally plausible for someone to feel that way and not realize the logic behind it.

comment by Vladimir_Nesov · 2012-01-07T18:55:23.511Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Something isn't right here. Do you mean it feels like a status grab - a status hit to others, avoided out of politeness?

Politeness is about covert/deniable transactions in status-related attributes, so it's a curiosity stopper in this context, not an explanation. It probably feels like a status hit because it's expected (perhaps incorrectly) to feel like a status grab to others. What you feel isn't generally a reason for responding a certain way, instead it's a means: something external should be a reason, whose detection might be represented as a feeling, in turn triggering a behavior.

comment by Stuart_Armstrong · 2012-01-07T19:00:19.161Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Then it's lucky I don't overthink these things.

And your story sounds plausible, but the opposite would sound equally plausible to me.

Replies from: Vladimir_Nesov
comment by Vladimir_Nesov · 2012-01-07T21:27:40.633Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Then it's lucky I don't overthink these things.

I was characterizing an emotional response, not reasoning. There doesn't seem to be a clear argument for that response being correct in this case.