Metastable

3.3K posts

Metastable banner
Metastable

Metastable

@metastable_1

Experiencing vertigo while standing on the precipice.

Katılım Aralık 2020
99 Takip Edilen141 Takipçiler
Metastable
Metastable@metastable_1·
"The national security advisor would have a mental breakdown if he understood the level of security at the nation’s leading AI labs." - situational-awareness.ai/lock-down-the-…
Chubby♨️@kimmonismus

Llama3(1) 405b (basemodel) really has leaked already. Here you can download it: 764GiB (~820GB) HF link: huggingface.co/cloud-district… Magnet: magnet:?xt=urn:btih:c0e342ae5677582f92c52d8019cc32e1f86f1d83&dn=miqu-2&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.openbittorrent.com%3A80 Torrent: files.catbox.moe/d88djr.torrent Credits: #p101516633" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">boards.4chan.org/g/thread/10151…

English
1
0
0
68
Metastable
Metastable@metastable_1·
@JimDMiller Wasn't US ahead of Europe on innovation well before AC became common?
English
1
0
0
51
James Miller
James Miller@JimDMiller·
Europe's lack of innovation relative to the US might in part be caused by their unwillingness to let their citizens use air conditioning, because air conditioning improves sleep quality and sleep is critical to thinking.
English
5
0
9
755
Metastable
Metastable@metastable_1·
@allTheYud How do you know the bunker is to hide from ASI?
English
0
0
1
114
Metastable
Metastable@metastable_1·
@JimDMiller That would speak to the quality of the brainstorm session but I'm not sure it's a good idea in itself. Cloning JvN on the other hand...
Metastable tweet media
English
0
0
3
47
Metastable retweetledi
Peter Barnett
Peter Barnett@peterbarnett_·
haha our model likes to talk about goblins no of course we dont know why, we dont know why the model does anything yes we are trying to make a superintelligent machine god, maybe it will like goblins too, we have no way of knowing what it will like, we hope it will like humans
English
24
92
1.3K
41.1K
Andrew Critch (🤖🩺🚀)
Andrew Critch (🤖🩺🚀)@AndrewCritchPhD·
3 cont'd) Here's Eliezer later cursing at people and calling them dishonest for insinuating that he called for nuclear attacks on datacenters, showing some combination of • a bad memory for his own violent speech, • disrespect toward others for critiquing his messaging, and/or • a failure to anticipate how his public communications about violence could be (mis)understood: x.com/ESYudkowsky/st… War is legally importantly different from murder, but anyway there sure seems to be a lot of violence going around in the LessWrong memespace. I realize the internet is plenty toxic without blaming LessWrong as some kind of epicenter… but the LessWrong community is unusually mission-oriented and AI-focussed, such that I think its standards of discourse matter more than the standards of most internet communities of a similar size. I've tried but sadly failed over the years to convince its core leaders to care more about this, and am somewhat at a loss. Maybe they'll listen to you?
Andrew Critch (🤖🩺🚀) tweet media
English
2
0
6
907
Ryan Greenblatt
Ryan Greenblatt@RyanPGreenblatt·
I think it's both true that LessWrong (LW) has a bunch of issues and that it would be better if much more discourse happened there rather than on X/Twitter. Some claims that all seem true to me despite being in tension: - Many people thinking about AGI/ASI/related post on X but not on LW - This is partially due to LW being scary/aversive - X is more insane and adversarial than LW - The quality of discourse on LW is way better than on X - The LW scene has specific unreasonable biases, is somewhat tribal, and is somewhat of an echo chamber, but on net LW seems way more reasonable than all of the AI parts of X - It would be good if way more of the important discussion about AI happened on LW or at least happened in a forum less messed up than X (or X got less messed up) - Epistemics of AI company employees seem pretty important and are quite bad, with some of the more important influences being internal chatter (with strong biases, influence from leadership, and echo chambers) or X for some of the companies - Public discourse/argumentation seems like it could improve epistemics, especially of AI company employees - LW is often hostile and aversive to AI company employees and some of this seems unhealthy/bad (as in, indicates insufficient decoupling/soldier-mindset/motivated-reasoning and corresponds to people piling on in unhelpful ways). But a bunch of this is a natural consequence of reasonable views of people on LW and the behavior of AI companies and employees at AI companies - E.g., it would be better if people on LW applied something more like typical researcher norms to research outputs (e.g., for many types of concerns, email the author with the concerns and see if they fix before posting publicly) and tried to avoid their criticism being unnecessarily rude (though not necessarily less hostile) - It would be good if many more AI company employees were interested in seriously trying to form detailed views about the future of AI and consequences of this. It would be good if a bunch of this happened via engagement and discussion on LW. - A serious limiting factor on the quality of discussion anywhere is that there is a limited supply of thoughtful and reasonable people and there is some adverse selection for who posts on online platforms frequently. The adverse selection for popular X accounts (that talk about AI) seems especially bad. - Most people rarely change their somewhat formed opinions based on arguments on the internet, but settings where people are more likely to change their mind are expensive and rare. - LW's problems/biases are unlikely to get way better in the future - Making LW better at the margin by participating in a reasonably high-effort way is good (and moderately leveraged for many people)
English
12
4
164
9.3K
OscarAI
OscarAI@Artedeingenio·
GPT Image 2 is also great for summarizing books or scientific essays through highly visual, detailed infographics. Here I asked it for an infographic on On the Origin of Species by Charles Darwin.
OscarAI tweet media
English
21
55
467
117.2K
Roko 🐉
Roko 🐉@RokoMijic·
We're doing the "Blender" game again There is a large blender. Everyone in the world has to decide whether to step into the blender. If at least 50% of the people do step into the blender, it will be unable to overcome their inertia to get started, and everyone survives. If less than 50% of the people step into the blender, then they all get blended up into paste and die. People who do not step into the blender suffer no adverse effects. Would you step into the blender? (Blue=step into the blender, Red= don't do that)
Roko 🐉 tweet media
Tim Urban@waitbutwhy

Everyone in the world has to take a private vote by pressing a red or blue button. If more than 50% of people press the blue button, everyone survives. If less than 50% of people press the blue button, only people who pressed the red button survive. Which button would you press?

English
220
166
3K
436K
unusual_whales
unusual_whales@unusual_whales·
AI chatbots misdiagnose in over 80% of early medical cases, per FT.
English
324
683
6.1K
537.3K
Tim Urban
Tim Urban@waitbutwhy·
Everyone in the world has to take a private vote by pressing a red or blue button. If more than 50% of people press the blue button, everyone survives. If less than 50% of people press the blue button, only people who pressed the red button survive. Which button would you press?
English
5.8K
1.5K
14.7K
27M
Liv Boeree
Liv Boeree@Liv_Boeree·
@waitbutwhy The real question is which monster forced this shitty game on the world in the first place, and can the world come together to punish that monster so much that such games never get played again.
English
49
8
496
42K
Aaron Rupar
Aaron Rupar@atrupar·
RFK Jr: "A Democratic senator claimed it's mathematically impossible to have a drug drop by 600%. I said, 'Well, if the drug was $100 and it raises to $600, that would be a 600% rise. If it drops from $600 to $100, that's a 600% savings.'" Trump: "Right"
English
7K
4.9K
33.9K
10M
Metastable
Metastable@metastable_1·
Question for AI-is-hitting-a-wall and AI-winter-is-coming people - how probable is it that funding and the number of papers go to the 2012 level in the next 20 years?
Metastable tweet media
English
2
1
4
1.7K