Against "Context-Free Integrity" 2021-04-14T08:20:44.368Z
"Taking your environment as object" vs "Being subject to your environment" 2021-04-11T22:47:04.978Z
I'm from a parallel Earth with much higher coordination: AMA 2021-04-05T22:09:24.033Z
Why We Launched LessWrong.SubStack 2021-04-01T06:34:00.907Z
"Infra-Bayesianism with Vanessa Kosoy" – Watch/Discuss Party 2021-03-22T23:44:19.795Z
"You and Your Research" – Hamming Watch/Discuss Party 2021-03-19T00:16:13.605Z
Review Voting Thread 2020-12-30T03:23:06.075Z
Final Day to Order LW Books by Christmas for US 2020-12-09T23:30:36.877Z
The LessWrong 2018 Book is Available for Pre-order 2020-12-02T11:21:00.221Z
AGI Predictions 2020-11-21T03:46:28.357Z
Rationalist Town Hall: Pandemic Edition 2020-10-21T23:54:03.528Z
Sunday October 25, 12:00PM (PT) — Scott Garrabrant on "Cartesian Frames" 2020-10-21T03:27:12.739Z
Sunday October 18, 12:00PM (PT) — Garden Party 2020-10-17T19:36:52.829Z
Have the lockdowns been worth it? 2020-10-12T23:35:14.835Z
Fermi Challenge: Trains and Air Cargo 2020-10-05T21:51:45.281Z
Postmortem to Petrov Day, 2020 2020-10-03T21:30:56.491Z
Open & Welcome Thread – October 2020 2020-10-01T19:06:45.928Z
What are good rationality exercises? 2020-09-27T21:25:24.574Z
Honoring Petrov Day on LessWrong, in 2020 2020-09-26T08:01:36.838Z
Sunday August 23rd, 12pm (PDT) – Double Crux with Buck Shlegeris and Oliver Habryka on Slow vs. Fast AI Takeoff 2020-08-22T06:37:07.173Z
Forecasting Thread: AI Timelines 2020-08-22T02:33:09.431Z
[Oops, there is actually an event] Notice: No LW event this weekend 2020-08-22T01:26:31.820Z
Highlights from the Blackmail Debate (Robin Hanson vs Zvi Mowshowitz) 2020-08-20T00:49:49.639Z
Survey Results: 10 Fun Questions for LWers 2020-08-19T06:10:55.386Z
10 Fun Questions for LessWrongers 2020-08-18T03:28:05.276Z
Sunday August 16, 12pm (PDT) — talks by Ozzie Gooen, habryka, Ben Pace 2020-08-14T18:32:35.378Z
Is Wirecutter still good? 2020-08-07T21:54:06.141Z
Sunday August 9, 1pm (PDT) — talks by elityre, jacobjacob, Ruby 2020-08-06T22:50:21.550Z
Sunday August 2, 12pm (PDT) — talks by jimrandomh, johnswenthworth, Daniel Filan, Jacobian 2020-07-30T23:55:44.712Z
What Failure Looks Like: Distilling the Discussion 2020-07-29T21:49:17.255Z
"Should Blackmail Be Legal" Hanson/Zvi Debate (Sun July 26th, 3pm PDT) 2020-07-20T04:06:26.275Z
Sunday July 19, 1pm (PDT) — talks by Raemon, ricraz, mr-hire, Jameson Quinn 2020-07-16T20:04:37.974Z
Sunday July 12 — talks by Scott Garrabrant, Alexflint, alexei, Stuart_Armstrong 2020-07-08T00:27:57.876Z
The silence is deafening – Devon Zuegel 2020-07-04T02:30:59.409Z
Inviting Curated Authors to Give 5-Min Online Talks 2020-07-01T01:05:39.794Z
Radical Probabilism [Transcript] 2020-06-26T22:14:13.523Z
Sunday June 28 – talks by johnswentworth, Daniel kokotajlo, Charlie Steiner, TurnTrout 2020-06-26T19:13:23.754Z - A Petition 2020-06-25T05:44:50.050Z
Prediction = Compression [Transcript] 2020-06-22T23:54:22.170Z
Online Curated LessWrong Talks 2020-06-19T02:16:14.824Z
Sunday June 21st – talks by Abram Demski, alkjash, orthonormal, eukaryote, Vaniver 2020-06-18T20:10:38.978Z
Superexponential Historic Growth, by David Roodman 2020-06-15T21:49:00.188Z
The one where Quirrell is an egg 2020-04-15T06:02:36.337Z
Coronavirus: Justified Key Insights Thread 2020-04-13T22:40:03.104Z
Hanson & Mowshowitz Debate: COVID-19 Variolation 2020-04-08T00:07:28.315Z
April Fools: Announcing LessWrong 3.0 – Now in VR! 2020-04-01T08:00:15.199Z
Small Comment on Organisational Disclaimers 2020-03-29T17:07:48.339Z
[Update: New URL] Today's Online Meetup: We're Using Mozilla Hubs 2020-03-29T04:00:18.228Z
March 25: Daily Coronavirus Updates 2020-03-27T04:32:18.530Z
Hanson vs Mowshowitz LiveStream Debate: "Should we expose the youth to coronavirus?" (Mar 29th) 2020-03-26T23:46:08.932Z


Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Where are intentions to be found? · 2021-04-21T02:36:49.870Z · LW · GW

This reminds me that it's hard for me to say where "I" am, in both space and time.

I read a story recently (which I'm going to butcher because I don't remember the URL), about a great scientist who pulled a joke: after he died, his wife had a seance or used a ouija board or something, which told her to look at the first sentence of the 50th page of his book, and the first sentence was "<The author> loved to find creative ways to communicate with people."

After people die, their belongings and home often contain an essence of 'them'. I think that some people build great companies or write code or leave children or a community, that in many ways is an instantiation of parts of their person. If you enter my bedroom, you will see my thoughts all over the walls, on the whiteboards, and to some extent you can still engage with me and learn from me there. More so than if I were physically in a coma (or cremated).

So it's not obvious to say "where" in the world I am and where you can learn about me.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Another (outer) alignment failure story · 2021-04-19T19:02:16.472Z · LW · GW

Curated. This was perhaps the most detailed yet informative story I've read about how failure will go down. As you say at the start it's making several key assumptions, it's not your 'mainline' failure story. Thx for making the assumptions explicit, and discussing how to vary them at the end. I'd like to see more people write stories written under different assumptions.

The sorts of stories Eliezer has told in the past have focused on 10-1000x faster takeoffs than discussed here, so those stories are less extended (you kinda just wake up one day then everyone dies). This slower one is helpful in seeing many of the relevant dynamics happen in more detail (although many of these issues wouldn't quite apply in the 1000x faster world).

Failure stories seem to me especially helpful in focusing research on what the actual problems will be. I also like this post in the context of Critch's post.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Alex Flint on "A software engineer's perspective on logical induction" · 2021-04-18T20:29:12.078Z · LW · GW

I would say that, if-and-only-if it's still alive for Alex, I'd enjoy him just writing down the basic things he said in his talk in like a couple of paragraphs, both the preamble at the top and his 4 slides or so.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Against "Context-Free Integrity" · 2021-04-17T01:40:15.706Z · LW · GW

If we make strong claims driven by emotions, then we should make sure to also defend them in less emotionally loaded ways, in a way which makes them compelling to someone who doesn't share these particular emotions.

Restating this in the first person, this reads to me as ”On the topics where we strongly disagree, you’re not supposed to say how you feel emotionally about the topic if it’s not compelling to me.” This is a bid you get to make and it will be accepted/denied based on the local social contract and social norms, but it’s not a “core skill of rationality”. 

You don’t understand what all my words mean. I’m not writing for everyone, so it’s mostly fine from where I’m sitting, and as I said I’m happy to give clarifications to the interested reader. This thread hasn’t been very productive right now though so I’ll drop it. Except I’ll add, which perhaps you’ll appreciate, I did indeed link to an IMO pretty extensive explanation of the reasons behind the ways I think Facebook is evil, and I don’t expect I would have written it that way had I not know there was an extensive explanation written up. The inferential gap would’ve been too big, but I can say it casually because I know that the interested reader can cross the gap using the link.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on What Multipolar Failure Looks Like, and Robust Agent-Agnostic Processes (RAAPs) · 2021-04-16T01:45:45.170Z · LW · GW

At this point, my plan is try to consolidate what I think the are main confusions in the comments of this post, into one or more new concepts to form the topic of a new post.

Sounds great! I was thinking myself about setting aside some time to write a summary of this comment section (as I see it).

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Against "Context-Free Integrity" · 2021-04-15T17:06:28.643Z · LW · GW

I don’t know why you want ‘disspassion’, emotions are central to how I think and act and reason, and this is true for most rationalists I know. I mean, you say it’s mindkilling, and of course there’s that risk, but you can’t just cut off the domain of emotion, and I will not pander to readers who cannot deal with their own basic emotions.

When I say Facebook is evil, I straightforwardly mean that it is trying to hurt people. It is intentionally aiming to give millions of people an addiction that makes their lives worse and their communities worse. Zuckerberg’s early pitch decks described Facebook’s users as addicted and made this a selling point of the company, analogous to how a drug dealer would pitch that their product got users addicted and this being a selling point for investing in the company. The newsfeed is an explicitly designed sparse reward loop that teaches you to constantly spend your time on it, reading through content you do not find interesting, to find the sparks of valuable content once in a while, instead of giving you the content it knows you want up front, all in order to keep you addicted. They are explicitly trying to take up as much of your free time as they can with an unhelpful addiction and they do not care about the harm it will cause for the people they hurt. This is what I am calling evil. I give a link in the OP to where Zvi explains a lot of the basic reasoning, the interested reader can learn all this from there. You might disagree about whether Facebook is evil, but I am using the word centrally, and I do not accept your implied recommendation to stop talking about evil things.

You’re saying things like ‘provocative’ and ‘mindkilling’ and ‘invoking tribal loyalties’, but you’ve not made any arguments relating that to my writing. My sense is you‘re arguing that all of my posts should kind of meet the analytic philosophy level of dryness where we can say that something is disgusting only in sentences like

Let us call an act that is morally wrong but not causing direct harm ”morally-disgusting-1”. Let us call an act that is not morally wrong but causes humans to feel disgust anyway “morally-discussing-2”. Let us explore the space between these two with a logical argument in three steps.

Whereas I want to be able to write posts with sentences like

I had been studying psychology for several years and built my worldview around it, and then after I discovered the replication crisis I felt betrayed. The scientists whose work I revered made me angry, and the fake principles I cherished now fill me disgust. I feel I was lied to and tricked for 8 years.

With little argument it seems (?) like you’ve decided the latter is ‘mindkilling’ and off-limits and shouldn’t be talked about.

There are absolutely more mature and healthy and rational ways of communicating about emotions and dealing with them, and I spend a massive amount of my time reflecting on my feelings and how I communicate with the people I talk to. If I think I might miscommunicate, I sometimes explicit acknowledge things like “This is how I’m feeling as I say this, but I don’t mean this is my reflectively endorsed position” or “I’m angry at you about this and I’m being clear about that, but it’s not a big deal to me on an absolute scale and we can move on if it’s also not a big deal to you“ or “I want to be clear that while I love <x> this doesn’t mean I think it’s obvious that you should love <x>” or “I want to be clear that you and I do not have the sort of relationship where I get to demand time from you about this, and if you leave I won’t think that reflects poorly on you”. Most emotional skills aren’t at all explicit, like having an emotion rise in me, reflecting on it, and realizing it just isn’t actually something I want to bring up. Perhaps I’m being too reactionary and should try to be more charitable (or I’m being too charitable and should try to be more reactionary). There’s lots of tools and skills here. But you’re not talking about these skills (perhaps you’d like to?), you’re mostly saying (from where I’m sitting) that using emotive or deontological language at all is to-be-frowned-on, which I can’t agree with.

I think that very few people (even here) are able to dispassionately evaluate arguments which call things "evil" and "disgusting",

I disagree. I think they have fairly straightforward meanings, and people can understand my claims without breaking their minds, though I am quite happy to answer requests for clarification. I agree it involves engaging with your own emotions, but we’re not Spock and I’m not writing for him.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Against "Context-Free Integrity" · 2021-04-15T16:13:59.098Z · LW · GW

I had an interesting conversation with Zvi about in which societies it was easiest to figure out whether the major societal narratives were false. It seemed like there was only a few major global narratives in times back then, whereas today I feel like there’s a lot more narratives flying around me.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Against "Context-Free Integrity" · 2021-04-15T16:12:16.139Z · LW · GW

"Constant vigilance, eh, lad?" said the man.

"It's not paranoia if they really are out to get you," Harry recited the proverb.

The man turned fully toward Harry; and insofar as Harry could read any expression on the scarred face, the man now looked interested.

Though, my point is that just like Moody, a person who is (correctly) constantly looking out for power-plays and traps, and will end up seeing many that aren’t there, because it’s a genuinely hard problem to figure out whether specific people are plotting against you.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on What Multipolar Failure Looks Like, and Robust Agent-Agnostic Processes (RAAPs) · 2021-04-15T01:25:02.188Z · LW · GW

I like this suggestion.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Against "Context-Free Integrity" · 2021-04-14T21:24:30.732Z · LW · GW

You should totally be less careful. On Twitter, if you say something that can be misinterpreted, sometimes over a million people see it and someone famous tells them you're an awful person. I say sometimes, I more mean "this is the constant state and is happening thousands of times per day". Yes, if you're not with your friends and allies and community, if you're in a system designed to take the worst interpretation of what you say and amplify it in the broader culture with all morality set aside, be careful.

Here on LW, I don't exercise that care to anything like the same degree. I try to be honest and truthful, and worry less about the worst interpreration of what I write. In hiring, there's a maxim: hire for strengths, don't hire for lack-of-weaknesses. It's to push against the failure modes of hiring-by-committee (typically the board) where everyone can agree on obvious weaknesses, but reward standout strengths less. Similarly in writing, I aim more to say valuable truths that aren't said elsewhere or can be succinctly arrived at alongside other LWers, rather than for lack of mistakes or lack of things-that-can-be-misinterpreted by anyone.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Against "Context-Free Integrity" · 2021-04-14T20:02:43.083Z · LW · GW

There are many forces and causes that lead use of deontology and virtue ethics to be misunderstood and punished on Twitter, and this is part of the reason that I have not participated in Twitter these past 3-5 years. But don't confuse these with the standards for longer form discussions and essays. Trying to hold your discussions to Twitter standards is a recipe for great damage to one's ability to talk, and ability to think.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Against "Context-Free Integrity" · 2021-04-14T19:51:34.844Z · LW · GW

I wanted to convey (my feeling of) the standard use of the word.

(of a person or action) showing a lack of experience, wisdom, or judgment.

"the rather naive young man had been totally misled"

I actually can imagine a LWer making that same argument but not out of naivete, because LWers argue earnestly for all sorts of wacky ideas. But what I meant was it also feels to me like the sort of thing I might've said in the past when I had not truly seen the mazes in the world, not had my hard work thrown in my face, or some other experience like that where my standard tools had failed me.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Against "Context-Free Integrity" · 2021-04-14T18:38:01.361Z · LW · GW

I hadn't thought of that. Not sure whether it's the same thing, but thanks for the comment. 

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Against "Context-Free Integrity" · 2021-04-14T18:37:11.316Z · LW · GW

That's a good summary.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Against "Context-Free Integrity" · 2021-04-14T08:26:26.559Z · LW · GW

Just after posting this on "Context-Free Integrity", I checked Marginal Revolution and saw Tyler's latest post was on "Free-Floating Credibility". These two terms feel related...

The kabbles are strong tonight.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on "Taking your environment as object" vs "Being subject to your environment" · 2021-04-13T00:38:30.702Z · LW · GW

I reflected on it some more, and decided to change the title.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Open and Welcome Thread - April 2021 · 2021-04-11T18:48:09.877Z · LW · GW

Welcome Max :) I hope you find deeply worthwhile things to read.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on My Current Take on Counterfactuals · 2021-04-09T19:00:14.092Z · LW · GW

I've felt like the problem of counterfactuals is "mostly settled" for about a year, but I don't think I've really communicated this online.

Wow that's exciting! Very interesting that you think that.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on I'm from a parallel Earth with much higher coordination: AMA · 2021-04-08T18:55:26.276Z · LW · GW

Yes, all societies are identical except insofar as what the officials pretend about it. People in very religious societies are having just as much sex as in modern secular societies, they just do it in a way that allowed officials to pretend it didn’t exist.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on I'm from a parallel Earth with much higher coordination: AMA · 2021-04-08T18:51:53.208Z · LW · GW

Welcome! (For my part. Eliezer can say “you’re welcome” for the blessing.)

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Rationalism before the Sequences · 2021-04-08T03:51:19.430Z · LW · GW

I've curated this essay[1].

Getting a sense of one's own history can be really great for having perspective. The primary reason I've curated this is because the post really helped give me perspective on the history of this intellectual community, and I imagine also for many other LWers.

I wouldn't have been able to split it into "General Semantics, analytic philosophy, science fiction, and Zen Buddhism" as directly as you did, nor would I know which details to pick out. (I would've been able to talk about sci-fi, but I wouldn't quite know how to relate the rest of it.)

That said, while I might be wrong, I do think there's one strand missing here, which is something like "lawful reasoning in physics and mathematics". I think ET Jaynes mastery of probability theory drives a lot of Eliezer's approach to rationality and AI, as well as Feynman's first-principles approach to reasoning, and neither of those authors are discussed except in the books at the end. (I guess they were more of Eliezer's path than yours.)

(I would be interested in people writing posts that address their historical relevance in a similar way to how Eric has written about other schools of thought here.)

The essay is very readable and somehow isn't 10x the length filled with extraneous detail, which is a common failure mode with histories. I think that's because you've written this from a personal perspective, which helps a lot. You know which details mattered to you because you lived through it, and I really appreciated reading this history from your perspective. I had never even heard of the book "Gulf", and now I know I'm going to read it. (The books list at the end is also great.)

Overall I'm delighted to have read this essay, thank you for writing it.


[1] Curated posts are emailed to the 3000-4000 readers who are subscribed to the twice-weekly curated posts.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on I'm from a parallel Earth with much higher coordination: AMA · 2021-04-08T03:38:03.443Z · LW · GW

I feel like the first two are enforceable with culture. For example I think many Muslim countries have a lot of success at preventing pornography (or at least, they did until the internet, which notably dath ilan seems to not quite have). I also have a sense that many people with severe mental/physical disabilities are implicitly treated as though they won't have children in our culture, and as a result often do not. But I agree it's hard to do it ethically, and both of the aforementioned ways aren't done very ethically in our civilization IMO.

For the latter, remember, Eliezer says he's an average guy in dath ilan. I think there are loads of ideas the average person on Earth hasn't heard about that are world-shaking and that only get discussed in quiet corners, like iterated embryo selection. I think with a culture where intellectuals much more get that this shouldn't be discussed publicly, even the fringes would go quiet.

(But FYI for me this was the least realistic part of dath ilan, until I started writing this comment and thought about it properly.)

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Rationalism before the Sequences · 2021-04-08T03:11:29.921Z · LW · GW

(Here are some of my thoughts, reading through.)

Sometimes I would get a flash of light through the fog, or at least a sense that there were other people on the same lonely quest. A bit of that sense sometimes drifted over USENET, an early precursor of today's Internet fora.

It's strange, I don't feel the fog much in my life. I wonder if this a problem. It doesn't seem like I should feel like "I and everyone around me basically know what's going on".

I can imagine certain people for whom talking to them would feel like a flash of light in the fog. I probably want to pursue talking to them.

my paternal grandfather gave me a book called "People In Quandaries".

That's an awesome name for a book. I want to write a book of "People In Quandaries" and how to get out of them. Just lots of short stories of people in various parts of life and civilization, and showing how better rationality can save them. I reckon that'd be really fun.

If nothing else, I hope this essay will leave you feeling grateful that you no longer have to do a decades-long bootstrapping process the way Eliezer and Nancy and I and others like us had to in the before times.

I remember being about 14, and walking home from school, with so many deep and philosophical questions about what the world was and how I related to it. That year I read The Sequences. I remember taking the same walk a year later, and realizing that I felt I had a pretty coherent worldview and had answered a lot of my fundamental questions. I had then a sense it was time to 'get to work'.

I am deeply grateful that I got to read this then, and didn't have to figure it out myself.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Reflective Bayesianism · 2021-04-07T01:08:02.514Z · LW · GW

The rules say we must use consequentialism, but good people are deontologists, and virtue ethics is what actually works.

—Eliezer Yudkowsky, Twitter

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on I'm from a parallel Earth with much higher coordination: AMA · 2021-04-07T00:11:15.705Z · LW · GW

"We have trained GPT-3 on all of reddit, and unleashed it for the population to use. Here are the freaking weird and beautiful and terrifying things that happened." vs "No we didn't do that because we're more careful and sensible."

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on I'm from a parallel Earth with much higher coordination: AMA · 2021-04-06T17:41:30.817Z · LW · GW

Yeah, I'm confused to think about who has got the weirder society. dath ilan has more global guardrails yet invests more into experiments. We've got fewer guardrails, but also a load of random "you can't sell that" rules. I think (?) that reddit doesn't exist in their world, or the free sex movement you mention, etc. So in some ways we're less ethically constrained, allowing us to find weird niches.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Dark Matters · 2021-04-05T00:43:15.932Z · LW · GW

Curated. This was an accessible yet technically precise overview of the evidence surrounding an open research area in physics / cosmology, and I'd like to see more of this sort of post on LW. I think had almost anyone tried this they would have made a really long post with lots of hard technical math and it wouldn't have been understood by many, so thanks.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Why We Launched LessWrong.SubStack · 2021-04-01T21:53:15.320Z · LW · GW

LessWrong IPO... nice idea.

<puts it in a folder for safekeeping>

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Why We Launched LessWrong.SubStack · 2021-04-01T19:50:55.167Z · LW · GW

(and brilliant point about cell phone bills)

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Why We Launched LessWrong.SubStack · 2021-04-01T19:49:47.292Z · LW · GW

(absolutely great use of that link)

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Why We Launched LessWrong.SubStack · 2021-04-01T19:00:01.875Z · LW · GW

Tut tut. It seems SubStack is in on the collusion too.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Why We Launched LessWrong.SubStack · 2021-04-01T18:50:37.895Z · LW · GW
Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Why We Launched LessWrong.SubStack · 2021-04-01T17:22:24.621Z · LW · GW

Where is the CAPTCHA?

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Why We Launched LessWrong.SubStack · 2021-04-01T10:08:43.151Z · LW · GW

Let’s see where we are in 24 hours.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Why We Launched LessWrong.SubStack · 2021-04-01T10:06:01.351Z · LW · GW

I’m glad to hear that we’re such reliable executors :)

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Why We Launched LessWrong.SubStack · 2021-04-01T08:33:24.133Z · LW · GW

Thank you. I would greatly enjoy more people sharing their takeaways from reading the posts.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Why We Launched LessWrong.SubStack · 2021-04-01T07:35:14.924Z · LW · GW

I had hoped the cheap price of bitcoin would allow everyone who wanted to to be a part of it, but I seem to have misjudged the situation!

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Disentangling Corrigibility: 2015-2021 · 2021-04-01T03:25:05.915Z · LW · GW

You're welcome. Yeah "invented the concept" and "named the concept" are different (and both important!).

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Disentangling Corrigibility: 2015-2021 · 2021-04-01T02:21:16.891Z · LW · GW

Here it is:

Rob Miles (May 2014):

Ok, I've given this some thought, and I'd call it:

"Corrigible Reasoning"

using the definition of corrigible as "capable of being corrected, rectified, or reformed". (And of course AIs that don't meet this criterion are "Incorrigible")

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Disentangling Corrigibility: 2015-2021 · 2021-04-01T02:02:47.178Z · LW · GW

I'm 94% confident it came from a Facebook thread where you blegged for help naming the concept and Rob suggested it. I'll have a look now to find it and report back.

Edit: having a hard time finding it, though note that Paul repeats the claim at the top of his post on corrigibility in 2017.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Rationalism before the Sequences · 2021-03-31T22:14:02.029Z · LW · GW

Hah, I was thinking of replying to say I was largely just repeating things you said in that post.

Nonetheless, thanks both Kaj and Eric, I might turn it into a little post. It's not bad to have two posts saying the same thing (slightly differently).

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Rationalism before the Sequences · 2021-03-31T02:29:25.340Z · LW · GW

The most important traits of the new humans are that... they prize rationality under all circumstances - to be accepted by them you have to retain clear thinking and problem-solving capability even when you're stressed, hungry, tired, cold, or in combat

Interestingly, as a LessWronger, I don't think of myself in quite this way. I think there's a key skill a rationalist should attain, which is knowing in which environments you will fail to be rational, and avoiding those environments. Knowing your limits, and using that knowledge when making plans.

One that I've dealt with, that I think is pertinent for a lot of people, is being aware of how social media can destroy my attention and leave me feeling quite socially self-conscious. Bringing them into my environment damages my ability to think

On the one hand, becoming able to think clearly and make good decisions while using social media is valuable and for many necessary. Here are some of the ways I try to do that, in the style of the Homo Novis:

But one of the important tools I have is avoiding being in those environments. I respond with very strict rules around Sabbath/Rest Days so I can clear my head. I also don't carry a phone in general, and install content blockers on my laptop. I think these approaches are more like "avoiding situations where I cannot think clearly" than "learning to think clearly in difficult situations".

There's a balance between the two strategies. "Learn to think clearly in more environments" and "shape your environment to help you think clearly / not hinder your ability to think clearly". In response to a situation where I can't think clearly, sometimes I pick the one, and sometimes the other.

All that said, Gulf is totally added to my reading list. I read both The Moon is a Harsh Mistress and Stranger in a Strange Land for the first time this year and that was a thrill.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Rationalism before the Sequences · 2021-03-31T00:33:09.545Z · LW · GW

Sounds good.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on Rationalism before the Sequences · 2021-03-30T22:55:52.853Z · LW · GW

The way I have set this up for writers in the past has been to setup crossposting from an RSS feed under a tag (e.g. crossposting all posts tagged 'lesswrong').

I spent a minute trying and failed to figure out how to make an RSS feed from your blog under a single category. But if you have such an rss feed, and you make a category like 'lesswrong' then I'll set up a simple crosspost, and hopefully save you a little time in expectation. This will work if you add the category old posts as well as new ones.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on [REPOST] The Demiurge’s Older Brother · 2021-03-29T01:07:53.668Z · LW · GW

I'm pretty sure we back-dated it in a mass import at the start of LW 2.0, and that in never had its day on the frontpage (or its day on LW 1.0), and that's why it has low engagement. There's like 100 comments on the original.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on "Infra-Bayesianism with Vanessa Kosoy" – Watch/Discuss Party · 2021-03-28T21:11:25.406Z · LW · GW

Oh woops, I realize I ended the call for everyone when I left. I'm sorry.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on "Infra-Bayesianism with Vanessa Kosoy" – Watch/Discuss Party · 2021-03-28T20:46:01.198Z · LW · GW

I understand that Infra-Bayesianism wants to be able to talk about hypotheses that do not describe the entire environment. (Like logical induction.) Something that just says “I think this particular variable is going to go up, but I don’t know how the rest of the world works.”

To do this, somehow magically using intervals over probabilities helps us. I understand it's trying to define a measure over multiple probability distribution, but I don't know quite how that maps to these convex sets, and would be interested in the basic relationship being outlined, or a link to the section that does it. (The 8 posts of math were scary and I didn't read them.)

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on "Infra-Bayesianism with Vanessa Kosoy" – Watch/Discuss Party · 2021-03-28T20:42:03.360Z · LW · GW

I am quite interested to get a first-person sense of what it feels like from the inside to be an Infra-Bayesian. In particular, is there a cognitive thing I already do, or should try, that maps to this process for dealing with having measure over different probability distributions?

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on "Infra-Bayesianism with Vanessa Kosoy" – Watch/Discuss Party · 2021-03-28T20:41:03.789Z · LW · GW

Here are some questions and confusions we had during the event.

Comment by Ben Pace (Benito) on "Infra-Bayesianism with Vanessa Kosoy" – Watch/Discuss Party · 2021-03-28T18:58:20.116Z · LW · GW

The Zoom Room is now open: