Replies

ajsadauskas, 1 year ago to fediverse

So let me get this straight.

The Effective Altruism/Musk/Thiel/MacAskill/Longtermism crowd is obsessed with artificial general intelligence.

Their view is that bringing about "friendly" AGI, along with space travel, should be humanity's top priority. They believe that if a “friendly” AGI superintelligence is created whose goals “are aligned” with “human goals,” then a new Utopian age will begin.

Their view is also that the biggest threat facing humanity is a malevolent AGI superintelligence, whose goals are not aligned with "human goals".

That's the dichotomy. Promote "friendly" superintelligence, avoid malevolent superintelligence.

Okay then.

Let's follow their logic.

Where would a socialist, feminist, or pro-Black superintelligence fit in that dichotomy?

If a superintelligence evaluated the data and decided that Emma Goldman and Comandante Che were basically right, and the best hope for humanity is to do away with all the billionaires, would that be a friendly superintelligence that's aligned with "human goals", or a malevolent one?

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2021/07/the-dangerous-ideas-of-longtermism-and-existential-risk @fediverse @technology

kibiz0r, 11 months ago

Step forward: we hear

That you are a good man.

You cannot be bought, but the lightning

Which strikes the house, also

Cannot be bought.

You hold to what you said.

But what did you say?

You are honest, you say your opinion.

Which opinion?

You are brave.

Against whom?

You are wise.

For whom?

You do not consider your personal advantages.

Whose advantages do you consider then?

You are a good friend.

Are you also a good friend of the good people?

Hear us then: we know.

You are our enemy. This is why we shall

Now put you in front of a wall. But in consideration of your merits and good qualities

We shall put you in front of a good wall and shoot you

With a good bullet from a good gun and bury you

With a good shovel in the good earth.

kibiz0r, 11 months ago

Wrong community, so I did have to down-doot… but I also dig your post.

Their philosophies are pretty much a way to morally and/or pseudo-scientifically ret-con the heinous, antisocial, extractive shit they were already gonna do anyway.

“I need the money in order to decide the path of the world, and I deserve to be the one who decides because I’m the one who managed to get the money.” There’s no room for democracy in their world view.