but there’s no reason to think we can’t achieve it
They provide a reason.
Just because you create a model and prove something in it, doesn’t mean it has any relationship to the real world.
What are we science deniers now?
but there’s no reason to think we can’t achieve it
They provide a reason.
Just because you create a model and prove something in it, doesn’t mean it has any relationship to the real world.
What are we science deniers now?
So, if just stop oil were peeing on people like… you are, I guess, you would be happy with that?
I know it feels really good to be angry and indignant, but I mean it, what have you done? Have you organized anything? Have you inspired people to take action?
You don’t have to agree with Just Stop. But the topic of conversation has come up. We’re talking about it. What will you do to save humanity from the sheer cliff it’s about to drive over?
I’m afraid “doing nothing” isn’t going to cut it here, man.
That’s great, man. Maybe they’ll write that on your underwater tombstone.
What did it raise awareness for? Nothing’s happened.
Human history and culture are leverage. The fact that people care about them is why they’re valuable.
Take a sledgehammer to an oil exec’s front door
Yeah, go for it. I support you.
it must be action that causes something useful to the cause,
Public attention can spur recruitment waves for the targets you really care about. If any campaign is to be effective, you need people to know who you are.
I’m taking it seriously. Are you not taking it seriously?
are taking publicity away
And this is being published where?
Here’s my challenge to you: every time you see Just Stop Oil pop up, post these articles. Get people excited about actually doing something.
They give the opportunity for climate change deniers to lump all climate change activists together with these idiots
Deniers are too far gone. You spray paint stone henge, they complain about the lichen. You splash color on a ferrari dealership, they complain about the small business owners. You bomb an oil rig, they say that violence never solves anything. They’re already not on our side.
Climate activists have chained themselves to trees, to construction equipment, to the property of the companies they protest. THAT is serious action.
You know we need more people doing stuff like this, right?
Not “climate activists.”
You.
Have you been inspired to chain yourself to oil infrastructure? To accomplish something real?
And did you make the news?
Oil companies are manipulating these people into being against climate change?
You’re welcome to work on that plan.
Not enough people are AWARE that it’s a THING.
I mean, considering how little has happened?
Don’t we need radicals at this point?
Isn’t it said that violence is the language of the unheard?
instead of education, politics, green energy investment, decentralization of financial power, etc etc etc.
When did An Inconvenient Truth come out again? Like, can I get a temperature check on the polite and respectful progress we’ve made since then?
No bad publicity.
This comment reminds me of when Bitcoin became the world’s dominant currency.
Do you mean the voice of Mario…?
I do not want an AI voice to puppet his corpse for the next 150 years.
Okay, so what’s your timetable then?
It’s a shame Putin is a bloodthirsty weirdo who won’t listen, I guess.
“Man, that hitler guy was pretty all right. …Wait, why are you calling me a nazi?”
I mean, do you just not know what Elon has been up to or what?
do not show me delicious things >:c
am hungry
Hey! Just asking you because I’m not sure where else to direct this energy at the moment.
I spent a while trying to understand the argument this paper was making, and for the most part I think I’ve got it. But there’s a kind of obvious, knee-jerk rebuttal to throw at it, seen elsewhere under this post, even:
If producing an AGI is intractable, why does the human meat-brain exist?
Evolution “may be thought of” as a process that samples a distribution of situation-behaviors, though that distribution is entirely abstract. And the decision process for whether the “AI” it produces matches this distribution of successful behaviors is yada yada darwinism. The answer we care about, because this is the inspiration I imagine AI engineers took from evolution in the first place, is whether evolution can (not inevitably, just can) produce an AGI (us) in reasonable time (it did).
The question is, where does this line of thinking fail?
Going by the proof, it should either be:
I’m not sure how to formalize any of this, though.
The thought that we could “encode all of biological evolution into a program of at most size K” did made me laugh.