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
There's a pretty strong relationship between one's self-image as a dispassionate rational thinker and the degree to which one is susceptible to fall for utterly irrational beliefs that are presented with some sort of scientific veneer
The belief in recursive intelligence explosion is a good example: only someone who thinks of themselves as a very-high-IQ hyper-rationalist could be susceptible to buy into it
If you want to fool a nerd, make long, complex, overly abstract arguments, free from the shackles of reality. Throw equations in there. Use physics analogies. Maybe a few greek words
People are subject to identity bias (you are more likely to believe a statement that seems to match your identity). If your identity is "I'm a rationalist", then you're more likely to fall for arguments that feature superficial scientific attributes.
The side joke is that a self-styled rationalist's primary mechanism for adopting beliefs remains identity reinforcement -- just like everyone else -- rather than the actual rational value of an argument.
So you’re saying AI will never write AI?
This is a very sneaky way to pooh pooh a position you disagree with ;)
Seed AI is a very feasible concept...
I know I’m not smart and definitely not very rational but why is the idea of recursive intelligence growth unrealistic. I thought a lot of knowledge ppl took that as a serious possibility.
For example, Stuart Russell, author of the classic AI textbook, recently published a book about it. Human Compatible: AI and the Problem of Control. I haven't read it but it's one of many examples of smart people worried about superhuman AI. https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~russell/hc.html …
After reading your essay and a reply to it by @ESYudkowsky
(https://intelligence.org/2017/12/06/chollet/ …), I'd say his text is much more convincing than your text.
I know that you effectively "agreed to disagree" here: https://mobile.twitter.com/fchollet/status/938855547796779009 …
But his logic and his critique seems to be correct.
More specifically, as soon as we create competent artificial software engineers and artificial AI researchers capable of contributing significantly to improving other artificial software engineers and artificial AI researchers, a significant "intelligence explosion" seems certain
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
