Man wouldn’t it be delightful if people happened to start adding a 1.7 suffix to whatever he calls himself next.

Also, Cremieux being exposed as a fake ass academic isn’t bad for a silver lining, no wonder he didn’t want the entire audience of a sure to become viral NYT column immediately googling his real name.

edit: his sister keeps telling on him on her timeline, and taking her at her word he seems to be a whole other level of a piece of shit than he’d been letting on, yikes.

Scott A. comes off as such a disaster of a personality. Hope it’s less obvious in his irl interactions.

(No spoiler tags because it’s just background lore for Dune that’s very tangential to the main plot)

Dune - after catastrophic wars between humans and AIs, computers are forbidden.

That’s a retcon from the incredibly shit Dune-quel books from like 15 years after the original author had died. The first Dune was written well before computers as we know them would come in vogue, and the Butlerian Jihad was meant to be a sweeping cultural revolution against the stranglehold that automated decision-making had achieved over society, fought not against off-brand terminators but the entrenched elites that monopolized access to the setting’s equivalent to AI.

The inciting incident semi-canonically (via the Dune Encyclopedia) I think was some sort of robo-nurse casually euthanizing Serena Butler’s newborn baby, because of some algorithmic verdict that keeping it alive didn’t square with optimal utilitarian calculus.

tl;dr: The Butlerian Jihad originally seemed to be way more about against-the-walling the altmans and the nadellas and undoing the societal damage done by the proliferation of sfba rationalism, than it was about fighting epic battles against AI controlled mechs.

It’s been ages since I read Hyperion but I think it’s one of those settings that start out somewhat utopian but as the story progresses you are meant to realize they are deeply fucked.

Also I had to look up Camp of the Saints, and I think complaining about living there may be a racist dog whistle.

edit: So apparently it really is a huge racist shibboleth, which makes me wonder if it’s common for grok to recommend it and nobody noticed because it’s kind of obscure.

I mean even if you somehow miss the whole computers are haram aspect of the duniverse, being a space peasant ruled by psychic tyrants still hardly seems like a winning proposition.

Children really shouldn’t be left with the impression that chatbots are some type of alternative person instead of ass-kissing google replacements that occasionally get some code right, but I’m guessing you just mean to forego I have kidnapped your favorite hamster and will kill it slowly unless you make that div stop overflowing on resize type prompts.

It should be noted that the only person to lose his life in the article was because the police, who were explicitly told to be ready to use non-lethal means to subdue him because he was in the middle of a mental episode, immediately gunned him down when they saw him coming at them with a kitchen knife.

But here’s the thrice cursed part:

“You want to know the ironic thing? I wrote my son’s obituary using ChatGPT,” Mr. Taylor said. “I had talked to it for a while about what had happened, trying to find more details about exactly what he was going through. And it was beautiful and touching. It was like it read my heart and it scared the shit out of me.”

I wonder how the inevitable presidential pardon will be handled if it comes before the movie is completed.

Microsoft’s Visual Studio says it’s going to incorporate coding ‘agents’ as soon as maybe the next minor version. I can’t really see them buying up car factories or beating pokemon, but agent- as an AI marketing term is definitely a part of the current hype cycle.

That IQ after a certain level somehow turns into mana points is a core rationalist assumption about how intelligence works.

Didn’t mean to imply otherwise, just wanted to point out that the call is coming from inside the house.

He claims he was explaining what others believe not what he believes

Others as in specifically his co-writer for AI2027 Daniel Kokotlajo, the actual ex-OpenAI researcher.

I’m pretty annoyed at having this clip spammed to several different subreddits, with the most inflammatory possible title, out of context, where the context is me saying “I disagree that this is a likely timescale but I’m going to try to explain Daniel’s position” immediately before. The reason I feel able to explain Daniel’s position is that I argued with him about it for ~2 hours until I finally had to admit it wasn’t completely insane and I couldn’t find further holes in it.

Pay no attention to this thing we just spent two hours exhaustively discussing that I totally wasn’t into, it’s not really relevant context.

Also the title is inflammatory only in the context of already knowing him for a ridiculous AI doomer, otherwise it’s fine. Inflammatory would be calling the video economically illiterate bald person thinks evaluations force-buy car factories, China having biomedicine research is like Elon running SpaceX .

(Are there multiple ai Nobel prize winners who are ai doomers?)

There’s Geoffrey Hinton I guess, even if his 2024 Nobel in (somehow) Physics seemed like a transparent attempt at trend chasing on behalf of the Nobel committee.

Also, add obvious and overdetermined to the pile of siskindisms next to very non-provably not-correct.

Come on, the AI wrote code that published his wallet key and then he straight up tweeted it in a screenshot, it’s objectively funny/harrowing.

Also the thing with AI tooling isn’t so much that it isn’t used wisely as it is that you might get several constructive and helpful outputs followed by a very convincingly correct looking one that is in fact utterly catastrophic.

Thanks, I’m broadly aware who the named people are, just not that there was such a prominent pedophilia angle.

Try searching the reddit sneerclub archives for more

No thanks, every time I read about Brent Dill’s sense of heroic responsibility I throw up in my mouth a little.

Here’s the full text:

Fake radical honesty: when a dishonest person self-discloses taboo or undesirable things about themselves, but then omits the worst thing or things. They make themselves look honest and they’re not. This nasty trick ruined my life once. It occurs to me that this ploy may have been used to cover up the miricult scandal (https://archive.is/miricult.com) after a discussion with someone about what happened. A friend said something like that they’d looked into this and the people involved confessed, but only one minor was molested. For some reason this resulted in increased trust. It should not have. Have you seen fake radical honesty anywhere?

For someone not steeped into the lore, why is this important?

karma

Works the same on LessWrong.

sarcophagi would be the opposite of vegetarians

Unrelated slightly amusing fact, sarcophagos is still the word for carnivorous in Greek, the amusing part being that the word for vegetarian is chortophagos and how weirdly close it is to being a slur since it literally means grass eater.

I am easily amused.