Skip to content
  • Home Home Home, current page.
  • Moments Moments Moments, current page.

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Language: English
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • Bahasa Melayu
    • Català
    • Čeština
    • Dansk
    • Deutsch
    • English UK
    • Español
    • Filipino
    • Français
    • Hrvatski
    • Italiano
    • Magyar
    • Nederlands
    • Norsk
    • Polski
    • Português
    • Română
    • Slovenčina
    • Suomi
    • Svenska
    • Tiếng Việt
    • Türkçe
    • Ελληνικά
    • Български език
    • Русский
    • Српски
    • Українська мова
    • עִבְרִית
    • العربية
    • فارسی
    • मराठी
    • हिन्दी
    • বাংলা
    • ગુજરાતી
    • தமிழ்
    • ಕನ್ನಡ
    • ภาษาไทย
    • 한국어
    • 日本語
    • 简体中文
    • 繁體中文
  • Have an account? Log in
    Have an account?
    · Forgot password?

    New to Twitter?
    Sign up
ESYudkowsky's profile
Eliezer Yudkowsky
Eliezer Yudkowsky
Eliezer Yudkowsky
Verified account
@ESYudkowsky

Tweets

Eliezer YudkowskyVerified account

@ESYudkowsky

Ours is the era of inadequate AI alignment theory. Any other facts about this era are relatively unimportant, but sometimes I tweet about them anyway.

Joined June 2014

Tweets

  • © 2018 Twitter
  • About
  • Help Center
  • Terms
  • Privacy policy
  • Cookies
  • Ads info
Dismiss
Previous
Next

Go to a person's profile

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @

Promote this Tweet

Block

  • Tweet with a location

    You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more

    Your lists

    Create a new list


    Under 100 characters, optional

    Privacy

    Copy link to Tweet

    Embed this Tweet

    Embed this Video

    Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Add this video to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Hmm, there was a problem reaching the server.

    By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.

    Preview

    Why you're seeing this ad

    Log in to Twitter

    · Forgot password?
    Don't have an account? Sign up »

    Sign up for Twitter

    Not on Twitter? Sign up, tune into the things you care about, and get updates as they happen.

    Sign up
    Have an account? Log in »

    Two-way (sending and receiving) short codes:

    Country Code For customers of
    United States 40404 (any)
    Canada 21212 (any)
    United Kingdom 86444 Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2
    Brazil 40404 Nextel, TIM
    Haiti 40404 Digicel, Voila
    Ireland 51210 Vodafone, O2
    India 53000 Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance
    Indonesia 89887 AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata
    Italy 4880804 Wind
    3424486444 Vodafone
    » See SMS short codes for other countries

    Confirmation

     

    Welcome home!

    This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.

    Tweets not working for you?

    Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.

    Say a lot with a little

    When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.

    Spread the word

    The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.

    Join the conversation

    Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.

    Learn the latest

    Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.

    Get more of what you love

    Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.

    Find what's happening

    See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.

    Never miss a Moment

    Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.

    1. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness May 28
      Replying to @ESYudkowsky @ArtirKel @juliagalef

      OK, another attempt at finding a crux. For you, decision theory is THE TRUE framework, according to which any practical method must be judged. For me, it’s just one bit of math among many, with no special value.

      1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
    2. Eliezer Yudkowsky‏Verified account @ESYudkowsky May 28
      Replying to @Meaningness @ArtirKel @juliagalef

      I'm not sure what you mean by "THE TRUE" here. I'm tempted to reply with https://arbital.com/p/expected_utility_formalism/?l=7hh … to explain what makes this math so specially relevant to decision-making and belief, but I have a dark presentiment that's not what you mean.

      2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
    3. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness May 28
      Replying to @ESYudkowsky @ArtirKel @juliagalef

      I’ve just now read the first bit of that, which is the Dutch Book Argument, so we’re back to where we started… maybe twitter needs a circular thread mechanism :)

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    4. Eliezer Yudkowsky‏Verified account @ESYudkowsky May 28
      Replying to @Meaningness @ArtirKel @juliagalef

      I didn't think DBA appeared there until later? Anyway, from the end: "We have multiple spotlights all shining on the same core mathematical structure, saying dozens of different variants on, 'If you aren't running around in circles or stepping on your own feet or...

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    5. Eliezer Yudkowsky‏Verified account @ESYudkowsky May 28
      Replying to @ESYudkowsky @Meaningness and

      ...wantonly giving up things you say you want, we can see your behavior as corresponding to this shape. Conversely, if we can't see your behavior as corresponding to this shape, you must be visibly shooting yourself in the foot.'"

      3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
    6. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness May 28
      Replying to @ESYudkowsky @ArtirKel @juliagalef

      So, my rephrasing would be something like: if a situation behaves in a way such that probability/decision theory works well when you apply it to that situation, then you should definitely do so. Which I agree with! It’s great when it works! In most situations, it doesn’t apply.

      1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
    7. José Luis Ricón (Artir)‏ @ArtirKel May 28
      Replying to @Meaningness @ESYudkowsky @juliagalef

      But when is it that you can't apply it?(By applying it I mean approximating it). What heuristics or methods are there that are superior to DT sometimes that are not approximations of it?

      2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
    8. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness May 28
      Replying to @ArtirKel @ESYudkowsky @juliagalef

      Oh! After brushing my teeth and before I forget :) maybe this is helpful: When designing an airplane wing, use finite element analysis, not DT. Implementing a network protocol, use a parser, not DT. In hydrology, use percolation theory, not DT.

      2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
    9. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness May 28
      Replying to @Meaningness @ArtirKel and

      I don’t think any of these are “approximations of DT” in any interesting sense. If you declare by fiat that DT is the Theory of Everything, then you could try to force-fit it… but that’s going to come out awkward and unconvincing.

      1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
    10. Eliezer Yudkowsky‏Verified account @ESYudkowsky May 28
      Replying to @Meaningness @ArtirKel @juliagalef

      If you don't see DT's laws as governing these cases, or if you think it's a critique of the use of DT that some option space is too large to be practically approximated; then I have the sense of pointing to a thing and a use that's still not in your ontology.

      1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
      Eliezer Yudkowsky‏Verified account @ESYudkowsky May 28
      Replying to @ESYudkowsky @Meaningness and

      This is like saying "When building a car engine, use the Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, thermodynamics may not tell you the tensile strength of steel". It's a type error. Like thermodynamics, DT holds true everywhere, whether or not it's useful to think about it right now.

      11:44 PM - 28 May 2018
      • 2 Likes
      • Francisco Boni Michael Porcelli
      1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness May 29
          Replying to @ESYudkowsky @ArtirKel @juliagalef

          So I think what you said here does express the crux of our disagreement (as I suggested earlier in the conversation). It seems that you think (1) DT has a special status among mathematical systems, and (2) that it is actually *true* of the macroscopic physical world.

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        3. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness May 29
          Replying to @Meaningness @ESYudkowsky and

          If we wanted to continue the discussion, and if you agree, we could see (1) in what way DT is special, and (2) in what way it is “true everywhere.”

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        4. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness May 29
          Replying to @Meaningness @ESYudkowsky and

          Thermodynamics is physics, not just math, and it is (presumably) true everywhere in space, by virtue of accurately representing physical phenomena. The Chomsky Hierarchy, relating parsers & language types, is “true everywhere” in the sense that physical space is irrelevant to it

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        5. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness May 29
          Replying to @Meaningness @ESYudkowsky and

          I take it that by “DT is true everywhere” you mean it is the correct analysis of all physical events (of a certain type, maybe), rather than just that it is a consistent branch of math. I don’t think that’s true.

          2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        6. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness May 29
          Replying to @Meaningness @ESYudkowsky and

          As for the specialness, I am guessing that you believe all rational methods can be viewed as applications of DT, and that DT is unique in having this property. If “rational” is defined as “applications of DT” (which you came close to doing earlier) then this is correct.

          1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
        7. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness May 29
          Replying to @Meaningness @ESYudkowsky and

          However, I would say that context-free parsing with a pushdown automaton is a rational method. (We may disagree just as a matter of definition! Which is fine of course.)

          1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
        8. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness May 29
          Replying to @Meaningness @ESYudkowsky and

          Offhand, I doubt parsing can be viewed in a DT framework at all (but maybe I’m wrong, and there’s some non-obvious mathematical reduction). If it can, it seems like it would very rarely if ever be meaningful or useful to view it that way.

          1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
        9. David Chapman‏ @Meaningness May 29
          Replying to @Meaningness @ESYudkowsky and

          Predicate calculus does have the property of universality: any formal method can be reduced to fopc. Thinking this way leads to logicism, which is (we agree?) a bad dead-end. I would expect that reducing everything to DT, if it were possible, would have the same bad consequences.

          0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
        10. End of conversation

      Loading seems to be taking a while.

      Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

        Promoted Tweet

        false

        • © 2018 Twitter
        • About
        • Help Center
        • Terms
        • Privacy policy
        • Cookies
        • Ads info