All of Said Achmiz's Comments + Replies

It’s “Novaya Zemlya” (“New Land”), not “Zovaya”.

1Jan Hendrik Kirchner
Thank you very much for pointing it out! Just checked the primary source there it's spelled correctly. But the misspelled version can be found in some newer books that cite the passage. Funny how typos spread... I'll fix it!

I haven’t read the linked post/comment yet, and perhaps I am missing something very obvious, but: we have exaflop computing (that’s 10^18) right now. Is Tim Dettmers really saying that we’re not going to see a 1000x speed-up, in a century or possibly ever? That seems like a shocking claim, and I struggle to imagine what could justify it.

EDIT: I have now read the linked comment; it speaks of fundamental physical limitations such as speed of light, heat dissipation, etc., and says:

These are all hard physical boundaries that we cannot alter. Yet, all these

... (read more)
1Daniel_Eth
Also, these physical limits – insofar as they are hard limits – are limits on various aspects of the impressiveness of the technology, but not on the cost of producing the technology. Learning-by-doing, economies of scale, process-engineering R&D, and spillover effects should still allow for costs to come down, even if the technology itself can hardly be improved.

These are great (and terrifying).

It’s hard to pick just one favorite, but I think I’ll go with that amazing last entry:

We noticed that our agent discovered an adversarial policy to move around in such a way so that the monsters in this virtual environment governed by the M model never shoots a single fireball in some rollouts. Even when there are signs of a fireball forming, the agent will move in a way to extinguish the fireballs magically as if it has superpowers in the environment.

Literally “hacking the Matrix to gain superpowers”.

Ah, I see.

As far as whether Eliezer came up with the idea on his own—as with most (though not all) of his ideas, the answer, as I understand it, is “sort of yes, sort of no”. To expand a bit: much of what Eliezer says is one or both of: (a) prefigured in the writings of other philosophers / mathematicians / etc., (b) directly inspired by some combination of things he’d read. However, the presentation, the focus, the emphasis, etc., are often novel, and the specifics may be a synthesis of multiple extant sources, etc.

In this particular case, I do not recall

... (read more)
1biomachine
Thank you so much!! This is what I didn't know I was looking for!

I confess I am not entirely clear on what it is that you’re looking for.

The quoted comment does not seem to be the sort of thing that one would cite a source for… or am I misunderstanding your question?

1biomachine
It may not be the sort of thing one would cite a source for, at least authoritatively . Sorry, maybe I should clarify that I'm a law student and I'm used to reading texts with tons of footnotes and references per page, which serve to refer where to find extensive information about a particular idea, and also sometimes for making somewhat stupid ad verecundiam arguments. I was just wondering if Yudkowsky came up with the idea behind the parragraph I quoted entirelly on his own (which is TOTALLY fine) or if he had some sources that served as inspiration. I understand that the truth-value of what he says is independent from whether he quotes sources or not, I just wanted to know if there are materials that expand specifically about the main idea behind what I quoted. Also, thank you for the patience.

The Bibliography of Eliezer’s book, Rationality: From AI to Zombies, may be of interest to you.

1biomachine
thank. you. so. much. i was wondering specifically about bibliography regarding the following: " Since my expectations sometimes conflict with my subsequent experiences, I need different names for the thingies that determine my experimental predictions and the thingy that determines my experimental results. I call the former thingies 'beliefs', and the latter thingy 'reality'". I suspect the most relevant reference towards it would be Feldman, Richard. “Naturalized Epistemology.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Summer 2012, edited by Edward N. Zalta. Correct me if i'm wrong, also, if you know of a another reference it would be awesome.