michael fares
7 posts


They are the same drug. Crystals can self-seed, where one configuration leads to other crystals growing from it in the same form. Nothing changed in the recipe for the drug. Once the new crystal form appeared it spread microscopically and all the other new batches got contaminated and the crystals "grew" as the useless form. Key point is that drugs spontaneously switching to a useless form in a way that can spread shows how physics/chemistry/biology may have all sorts of hidden ways that they could make our world fall apart, and superintelligence could find them.
English

When I talk to people that instantly, deeply, get the risk from superintelligence, they often share a trait sometimes called the "security mindset"
I think this post by @l_mc_nally is a nice brisk touch of what it feels like to think seriously about security even briefly.
1/

English

@JoinTorchbearer @ControlAI See! All it takes is just one, two, three people to start changing thing. You are not powerless brother.
English

A team of about 3 from @ControlAI cold-emailed the UK Parliament about AI extinction risk. At the time they had no contacts, insider help, or established organisation behind them.
16 months later: 125 cross-party signatories, two House of Lords debates, and a Commons amendment.

English

@JoinTorchbearer @Siliconvos What a detailed guide, Silly put a lot of effort in this one!
English

A common argument against AI regulation asks what happens if superintelligence (ASI) is impossible.
This clip from @Siliconvos covers many of the paths to ASI that an AI model could take, and why it's likely NOT impossible.
But if it turns out it IS impossible, why regulate it?
English

Alas, they've historically also been at the forefront of trying to get people to be much more coy (they've in the past tried quite hard to get me to delete lab-critical comments from LessWrong).
lesswrong.com/posts/vFqa8DZC…
Maybe you think they changed, but I don't really believe it.

English

I agree with Connor that most folks concerned about AI have been far too coy about extinction risk, and that ControlAI is one of few exceptions. The world needs more earnest communication efforts.
Connor Leahy@NPCollapse
We think ControlAI can turn $50M / year into a 10% chance of banning ASI. Most of the AI safety community has been far too coy about extinction risk. We're not. It's not that complicated: AI smarter than humanity poses an unacceptable risk of human extinction, and we need an international ban on its development. Here's our plan to get this done.
English

@JoinTorchbearer @romanyam @triggerpod In his book: "Unexplainable, Unpredictable, Uncontrolable." He lays the groundwork for each of those points, and it makes a very clear message that if we dont take action, the train will hit us.
Join pauseAI, Join torchbearer community, GET UP and MOVE! Do something.
English

Roman Yampolskiy @romanyam, one of the longest-working researchers on AI safety, was recently on @triggerpod.
His assessment of the frontier is stark. He points out that nobody is currently claiming to have a viable safety mechanism. No lab, no paper, & no concrete framework. 🧵
English

