@Zoidbort @CanadiensMTL ??? we scored two fluky goals, those were not quality chances lol
English
ben
9.3K posts
ben
@benchanceyy
worried about animals and ai mostly @mcgillu
Montréal, Québec Katılım Mayıs 2016
183 Takip Edilen164 Takipçiler
@CanadiensMTL God damn two goals on seven shots, insane. Just goes to show you quality shots versus shots
English
ben retweetledi
"Animals must be off the menu because tonight they are screaming in terror in the slaughterhouse, in crates, and cages. Vile ignoble gulags of despair. I heard the screams of my dying father as his body was ravaged by the cancer that killed him. And I realised I had heard these screams before. In the slaughterhouse, eyes stabbed out and tendons slashed, on the cattle ships to the Middle East and the dying mother whale as a harpoon explodes in her brain as she calls out to her calf. Their cries were the cries of my father. I discovered when we suffer, we suffer as equals. And in their capacity to suffer, a dog is a pig is a bear is a boy."
--Philip Wollen youtube.com/watch?v=uQCe4q…
YouTube
English
@cehennem_dunya1 @morallawwithin @TrueSlazac what is your preferred slur for someone who is so performatively angry they can't spot even the most obvious instances of sarcasm on the internet ?
English
@morallawwithin @TrueSlazac Do you think google was working on real clouds before they implemented ai ? The same servers are still used, your performative argument is retarded
English
I can't imagine caring that much about whether your objective numeral answer is given by AI or a human
English
@olivertraldi @PAHoyeck Her sources of normativity is one one of the worst things I’ve been forced to read
In her chapter on moral realism she criticizes it on the basis that people disagree about morality
English
“The sources of morality rest squarely in human beings and the claims that we make on each other, rather than in something like ontological facts about the good. I think of morality more as a practice than as a body of knowledge.”
—Christine Korsgaard on ethics
English
ben retweetledi
@TaylorLorenz Your home is here—with the other type of mentally ill posters.
English
@morallawwithin She could just not be into art and have been going along with it for the sake of the dating
English
You shouldn’t lie!! These things are just lies, and they are evil!!
cookie🍪@cookiecarver
a while ago a girl rejected me after our second date. she said she would like if we were just friends. i said hey that's fine would you still like to go to that art exhibition we were talking about? she said no thanks. the second rejection was worse than the first one
English
@NathanpmYoung Don’t think so: x.com/benchanceyy/st…
ben@benchanceyy
@NathanB60857242 @panickssery I don’t think so. That kind of meat is usually expensive, much more expensive than basic vegan food. So if you are considering how to use your money to maximize utility, it will almost certainly be preferable to donate the difference in cost than to buy it.
English
@NathanB60857242 @panickssery Also it depends what you think about the net-effects of crop agriculture. Probably they will dominate the net-value of each farmed animal’s life, given how many plants are needed to feed it.
English
@NathanB60857242 @panickssery I don’t think so. That kind of meat is usually expensive, much more expensive than basic vegan food. So if you are considering how to use your money to maximize utility, it will almost certainly be preferable to donate the difference in cost than to buy it.
English
If some farm animals, outside of factory farms, have lives worth living on net, then the utilitarian must concede that it's actually more ethical to buy them (increasing the demand for the production of their lives) than to be a vegan?
English
@LukeJohn82 @TylerDMcNabb why speak so confidently about that which you do not understand
English
@TylerDMcNabb For any range of fine-tuned values we have a universe that contains something that could only exist given that range; thus for any universe fine-tuning argument reasoning implies the existence of a God who "fine-tuned" for such a thing to be. It's epistemically vacuous.
English
Ummmmm wait. This is not wrecking Douthat's argument. This doesn't even seem like the author is familiar with relevant literature on fine-tuning or understands the problem. - me, also a philosopher
'One reaction to the fine-tuning argument, which I favor, is that the argument fails to take into consideration what’s called an “observation selection effect.” Applied to this case, once you condition on the fact that life did emerge in this universe, then it follows, simply as a matter of logic, that the universe’s properties support life.'
Nathan J Robinson@NathanJRobinson
A philosopher utterly wrecks Ross Douthat's terrible arguments for God in his book about why "everyone should be religious": currentaffairs.org/news/ross-dout…
English
ben retweetledi
@serenadex1 @morallawwithin you need not believe this about specifically language models
English
@morallawwithin Do you actually, seriously think that LLMs will lead to everyone on earth dying?
English
I don’t know what these people want me to do. I can’t control the circumstances I find myself in. People want to make a God without having seriously solved the hard questions about alignment. I think proceeding in this way will kill literally everyone, if they really are successful at what they intend. I don’t think we should oppose them with vigilante violence, for moral and prudential reasons. What am I supposed to do in this situation? Am I just supposed to passively die because people who can’t be convinced either way will assign blame to me for things other people do? What is the correct way to deal with this situation?
Sriram Krishnan@sriramk
I think the doomers need to take a serious look at what they have helped incite and not just rely on “we condemn this and have said this is not the rational response”. This is the logical outcome of “If we build it everyone dies”.
English
@m966021 Can't you avoid the repugnant conclusion by using an aggregation function that isn't extremely stupid?
English
Why doesn't Will buy shrimp welfare arguments?
English
@arr_ohh_bee @jessesingal Will MacAskill is an EA co-founder. His credence in consequentialism, even if you condition on the truth of moral realism, is less than 50%. A substantial proportion of what remains is given to deontology. It is therefore not the case that EAs reject or have to reject it.
English
@benchanceyy @jessesingal > His credence in consequentialism is not even above 50% conditional on realism.
First, go argue with the article writer. I was trying to better explain what he may have meant. Second, you may wish to better explain the above to all of us. It sounds like gibberish.
English
Michael Shellenberger accuses effective altruists of "reject[ing]" the ten commandments and disagreeing that "life is sacred." Genuinely unsure where to even begin with this, on multiple levels.
English
@MinCorpPixel @InVitroFuture it presupposes an openness to being persuaded, but anyway. the point is just that they were not ‘forced’ by events to accept that bernie’s support would be a good thing. they went out and sought it proactively by meeting with him, which certainly presupposes a desire for it.
English
@benchanceyy @InVitroFuture were they? I know he talked to them for a public interview, but that seems like an action that presupposes taking AI risk seriously
English
Very fun to see the "we're far too clever and rational for normal politics" people being gradually forced by Events to put out statements like, "ok, I ran the numbers again, and it's maybe not terrible that the most popular politician in the country is championing our proposal"
Eliezer Yudkowsky ⏹️@ESYudkowsky
Update: I'm told that this bill contains export controls on chips, to prevent them from going to any other country that fails to sign onto safety standards. That's huge and I shift my stance from neutral to positive on the effects of the bill if passed.
English
@JonCrowellOrg @jessesingal EA is not utilitarianism, many EAs are not even consequentialist, including its co-founder Will MacAskill, and most importantly none of its core tenets require that you reject non-consequentialist ethics. Nearly all normative theories endorse doing more rather than less good.
English
@arr_ohh_bee @jessesingal They absolutely do not and nothing in EA’s core tenants require that one do. Will MacAskill, who rather famously founded Effective Altruism, is not a consequentialist. His credence in consequentialism is not even above 50% conditional on realism.
English
@jessesingal He is really trying to say that they reject all deontological ethics. See: plato.stanford.edu/entries/ethics…
English