Comment by brahmaneya on 2014 Less Wrong Census/Survey · 2014-10-23T21:15:36.840Z · LW · GW

Took the survey, except for the digit ratio part.

Comment by brahmaneya on Walkthrough of "Definability of Truth in Probabilistic Logic" · 2013-12-13T01:02:15.429Z · LW · GW

You have mentioned the weakened reflection principle as being the following: ∀φ∈L'. ∀a,b∈Q. a≤P(φ)≤b ⇒ P(a<P('φ')<b)=1

This seems to be a typo, it should be ∀φ∈L'. ∀a,b∈Q. a<P(φ)<b ⇒ P(a<P('φ')<b)=1

Comment by brahmaneya on Serious Stories · 2012-11-15T02:01:12.678Z · LW · GW

Probably because the negative feelings about the pain are what strongly motivate you to avoid it, and hence avoid physical damage.

Comment by brahmaneya on 2012 Less Wrong Census/Survey · 2012-11-04T19:08:37.480Z · LW · GW

Took the survey!

Comment by brahmaneya on Rationality Quotes July 2012 · 2012-08-03T21:06:24.746Z · LW · GW

I don't his comment about Buddhist people being not different is even true. They are, for example, on the average, less violent than Muslims. They're simply not different to the extent he expected them to be.

Comment by brahmaneya on Thoughts on the Singularity Institute (SI) · 2012-05-14T04:03:44.876Z · LW · GW

Anyway, it feels completely ridiculous to talk about it in the first place. There will never be a mind that can quickly and vastly improve itself and then invent all kinds of technological magic to wipe us out. Even most science fiction books avoid that because it sounds too implausible

Do you acknowledge that :

1. We will some day make an AI that is at least as smart as humans?
2. Humans do try to improve their intelligence (rationality/memory training being a weak example, cyborg research being a better example, and im pretty sure we will soon design physical augmentations to improve our intelligence)

If you acknowledge 1 and 2, then that implies there can (and probably will) be an AI that tries to improve itself