Przejdź do głównej zawartości


Today's threads (a thread)

Inside: A Pascal's Wager for AI Doomers; and more!

Archived at: https://pluralistic.net/2026/04/16/pascals-wager/

#Pluralistic

1/
A killer 1940s robot zapping two large domes with eye-lasers; trapped under the domes are two children, taken from 1910s photos of child laborers; one, a little girl in a straw hat, is holding two heavy buckets. The other, a newsie with a shoulder bag, is picking his nose. The background is the collapsing pillars seen in Dore's engraving of The Death of Solomon.

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/2

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/3

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/4

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/5

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/6

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/7

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/9

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/10

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/11

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/12

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/13

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/14

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/15

Ostrzeżenie o treści: Long thread/eof

Thanks. The Pascal’s Wager analogy is good, and I agree that large LLCs pose the more imminent threat but finding common projects with AI doomers isn’t a bad idea..
Nice 👏
Best line of the essay: 😆

"the artificial lifeforms that worry me aren't hypothetical – they're here today, amongst us, endangering the very survival of our species. These artificial lifeforms are called "limited liability corporations" and they are a concrete, imminent risk to the human race"

Cory Doctorowudostępnił to.

wow! You can really write those words!

A superb piece that will be rattling around my echo chamber for days.

Bravo!
Ten wpis został zedytowany (1 dzień temu)
There is no doubt that Bengio is both very smart and a decent mensch. And he can still be wrong about how advanced "AI" can become. Wrong in the way any deeply learned scientist may simply have wrong intuitions.

Now, who can say what can happen in 100 years? But first we need to (collectively) get to that age, which means solving known and imminent problems, which means building the communication tools that will support problem solving at scales we havent done anytime before.
@openrisk
Clarke's First Law:
When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.

Asimov's corollary:
When, however, the lay public rallies round an idea that is denounced by distinguished but elderly scientists and supports that idea with great fervour and emotion – the distinguished but elderly scientists are then, after all, probably right.
I have an objection to Clarke's First Law: Martin Fleischmann was 62 when he announced cold fusion was "very easy"