tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post5999264466432462646..comments2023-11-22T01:14:54.298-08:00Comments on amor mundi: "In cyberspace no one can hear you scam."Dale Carricohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02811055279887722298noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-35265018286600335962016-06-07T07:32:02.759-07:002016-06-07T07:32:02.759-07:00> . . .that deadly daydream. . .
https://www.y...> . . .that deadly daydream. . .<br /><br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_l0FaZPS2I<br />------------------<br />Louis Theroux discusses Scientology and undercover reporting - Rambam <br />Published on May 13, 2016<br />Louis Theroux discusses his new documentary "My Scientology Movie" with Rambam.<br /><br />11:06/12:54<br /><br />Linda Hakeboom: And who are they, then, in your words?<br /><br />Louis Theroux: Well -- I'm talking about the Sea Org now,<br />which is mainly what we were focussed on. . .<br /><br />Linda: Yes.<br /><br />Louis: The innermost. . .<br /><br />Linda: The most intense, inside group.<br /><br />Louis: The spiritual warriors. . .<br /><br />Linda: Yes.<br /><br />Louis: They are a vanguard of spiritual revolutionaries.<br />And the question that you have to ask yourself is: if you<br />truly believed that it was in your hands to revolutionize<br />the planet in such a way that insanity, war, crime would all<br />be eradicated, what would you not be willing to do?<br />What would you **not** be willing to do to achieve that<br />end?<br />====<br />jimfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04975754342950063440noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-91785933845121959422016-06-07T06:56:43.591-07:002016-06-07T06:56:43.591-07:00> . . .non-thing blah blah likely will blah bla...> . . .non-thing blah blah likely will blah blah in blah blah<br />> years because blah blah blah. . .<br /><br />https://thingofthings.wordpress.com/2016/02/17/concerning-miris-place-in-the-ea-movement/<br />--------------------<br />Concerning M[achine]I[ntelligence]R[esearch]I[nstitute]’s<br />Place in the E[ffective]A[ltruism] Movement<br />17 Feb 2016<br />Posted by ozymandias in effective altruism<br /><br />. . .<br /><br />I am completely unqualified to assess the evidence that MIRI<br />is or is not an effective organization: I cannot tell apart a<br />deep mathematical finding from one that’s trivial or even<br />incorrect, and I don’t have a sense for how much math one<br />should expect mathematicians to create. However, several<br />people I trust have said -- mostly in private conversations --<br />that to them MIRI appears to be producing about as much math<br />as half a C[omputer]S[cience] grad student. If true, this<br />is a damning statement. [How much **math** are CS grad<br />students expected to produce?]<br /><br />However, very, very few of the conversations I’ve seen about<br />MIRI have centered around MIRI’s effectiveness as an<br />organization. . .<br /><br />It is genuinely difficult to figure out a way of assessing the<br />effectiveness of a speculative organization like MIRI. If they<br />produce little math, is this because of the difficulty of the<br />problem or some kind of organizational incompetence? . . .<br /><br />There are a lot of reasons people don’t want to have this<br />conversation. Most obviously, it would create drama, and many<br />people are averse to drama. Many people, including myself,<br />have a lot of respect for Eliezer Yudkowsky as a person. However,<br />it should not be taken as an insult to say “I’ve looked into it,<br />and I don’t think the charity you’re running is particularly<br />effective”; ideally, our norm should be that that sort of criticism<br />is a **compliment**. We’re all trying to do the most good here,<br />right? . . .<br /><br />To be clear, I am not saying that MIRI is an ineffective<br />organization; as I said above, I am incapable of assessing MIRI’s<br />effectiveness. However, I do want to encourage speaking up among<br />people who are privately thinking “MIRI isn’t very effective”<br />but feel reluctant to say anything because they don’t want to<br />create drama or start shit. And I do think the evidence is unclear<br />enough that we should have an informed discussion of this issue. . .<br /><br />“Is MIRI effective?” is just another question. And it’s about<br />time we put serious effort into finding the answer.<br />====<br /><br /><br />Some day they'll clama for my drama. ;-><br />jimfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04975754342950063440noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-23950951291801182692016-06-06T16:40:12.586-07:002016-06-06T16:40:12.586-07:00> . . .blah blah non-thing blah blah will likel...> . . .blah blah non-thing blah blah will likelier blah blah sooner<br />> because blah blah blah. . .<br />><br />> Science!<br /><br />http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2016/06/06/terrible-awful-no-good-writing/<br />-----------------<br />[I]ndefatigably incompetent Suzan Mazur. . . is a weird case.<br />She clearly aspires to be a real live science journalist,<br />but the science she wants to track down is all this fringey<br />nonsense. . .<br /><br />But here’s the real shame. For once, Mazur has an interesting story<br />to write up, and she loses it in a disorganized, incoherent mess<br />of a ramble. . . This is actually kind of important:<br /><br />> NASA’s Astrobiology Program — headed by Mary Voytek — awarded<br />> $1.108M (5% of its annual budget) to the Center of Theological Inquiry,<br />> a religious think tank with more than $23M in assets, to investigate<br />> how the world’s religions might respond to the discovery of life<br />> on other planets. John Templeton Foundation is co-sponsoring the<br />> two-year project (2015-2017) with a $1.7M grant to CTI.<br /><br />Hang on. NASA gave a million dollars to a prosperous theological<br />think tank, which also got a hefty donation from the Templeton Foundation,<br />to do what? We don’t need to investigate how religion will respond,<br />we already know: some will take it in stride and try to incorporate<br />discoveries into their belief systems, and some will actively deny<br />it. Why is a NASA program throwing away 5% of their budget on trying<br />to scry how the irrational will respond to something they haven’t<br />found yet?<br /><br />That’s a story. . .<br />====<br /><br /><br />Good heavens, Miss Sakamoto! You're beautiful!<br /><br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZOW5GdgCGwjimfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04975754342950063440noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-26748660457062483922016-06-06T13:10:39.937-07:002016-06-06T13:10:39.937-07:00Nobody never right thinks blah blah non-thing blah...Nobody never right thinks blah blah non-thing blah blah likely will blah blah in blah blah years because blah blah blah but also ran never right thinks instead blah blah non-thing blah blah will likelier blah blah sooner because blah blah blah. Science!Dale Carricohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02811055279887722298noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5956838.post-87272383596108965302016-06-06T06:32:03.685-07:002016-06-06T06:32:03.685-07:00They're postponing my Singularity!
http://www...They're postponing my Singularity!<br /><br />http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2016/06/cytological-utopia-and-the-rap.html#more<br />-------------------<br />Greg. Tingey<br />June 5, 2016<br />214:<br /><br />There is an alternative future for humanity,<br />not encompassed by Fedorov or the "transhumanists",<br />that I was introduced to at a very early age. . .<br />The worlds & universe as seen in "Last & First Men"<br />& the other works of Olaf Stapeldon.<br /><br />The moral compass & outlook is, if not "opposed", is certainly<br />completely orthogonal to the drives, desires & stated aims<br />of people like Dirk, here. . .<br /><br />---<br /><br />Dirk Bruere replied to this comment from Greg Tingey<br />June 5, 2016<br />215:<br /><br />That is the traditional flying car and galactic empire future,<br />which is now off the menu.<br /><br />Once we create general AI it all ends. The only argument is when.<br />My view for the past 30 years has been around the year 2035.<br />However, if it is 2080 it really doesn't make much difference.<br />This century is the last where H[omo]S[apiens]S[sapiens]<br />is the dominant species on earth.<br />====<br /><br /><br />http://www.softmachines.org/wordpress/?p=1890<br />-------------------<br />Giulio Prisco <br />June 6, 2016<br /><br />Robin [Hanson] thinks that mind uploading is likely to be<br />developed much before sentient AI. I think the two are likely<br />to develop at comparable paces with strong feedback loops,<br />with advances in one stimulating advances in the other<br />(or roadblocks in one creating roadblocks in the other) and<br />reach operational maturity at more or less the same time near<br />the end of the century, give or take a couple of decades. . .<br />====<br /><br />jimfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04975754342950063440noreply@blogger.com