Start AtTheEnd

Oct 8, 2024 | lesswrong.com | Peter McCluskey |Nathan Helm-Burger |Roger Dearnaley |Start AtTheEnd

How can we make many humans who are very good at solving difficult problems? Summary (table of made-up numbers)I made up the made-up numbers in this table of made-up numbers; therefore, the numbers in this table of made-up numbers are made-up numbers. Call to actionIf you have a shitload of money, there are some projects you can give money to that would make supergenius humans on demand happen faster.

Jan 11, 2024 | lesswrong.com | Start AtTheEnd

The "A" of "AI" is sufficient for human extinction. What a dangerous AI might do to us, we're already doing ourselves, mainly by the help of technology, which takes charge of human decisions. It's not the addition of artificial intelligence, but the lack of human involvement, which nets us dystopia. To explain why this is the case, I'm going to borrow a really useful view from a post on qualiacomputing titled "Wireheading Done Right", namely that of "Consciousness vs. Pure Replicators".

Oct 5, 2023 | lesswrong.com | Peter McCluskey |Joseph Van Name |Start AtTheEnd

I've been hearing vague claims that automated theorem provers are ableto, or will soon be able to prove things about complex software such asAIs.Max Tegmark and Steve Omohundro have now published a paper, ProvablySafe Systems : The Only Path To ControllableAGI, which convinces me that this isa plausible strategy to help with AI safety. The basic steps:Write trustworthy AIs that are capable of searching for proofs andverifying them. Specify safety properties that we want all AIs to obey.