Comments on: The Conversation So Far http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/06/the-conversatio.html Overcoming Bias is economist Robin Hanson’s blog, on honesty, signaling, disagreement, forecasting, and the far future. Sun, 12 Feb 2012 02:20:49 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: Overcoming Bias : Singularity PR Dupes? http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/06/the-conversatio.html#comment-431803 Overcoming Bias : Singularity PR Dupes? Sat, 22 Aug 2009 13:55:23 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2008/06/the-conversation-so-far.html#comment-431803 [...] who followed my debate here at OB with Eliezer Yudkowsky last year (e.g., here, here) will be familiar with all this, but let me review.  Here are some of the more controversial [...] [...] who followed my debate here at OB with Eliezer Yudkowsky last year (e.g., here, here) will be familiar with all this, but let me review.  Here are some of the more controversial [...]

]]> By: Tim Tyler http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/06/the-conversatio.html#comment-401369 Tim Tyler Thu, 10 Jul 2008 08:17:03 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2008/06/the-conversation-so-far.html#comment-401369 Thinking about what chain of events could plausibly produce a two-stage increase in the acceleration rate, my guess would be: 1. Synthetic minds 2. Synthetic bodies We'll probably get advanced AI first, which will then help to produce advanced nanotechnology. In both cases, any shift is likely to occur when the engineered technology becomes broadly competitive with the existing natural one it is supplanting. The new replicators will first build themselves minds, and then use those minds to build themselves bodies. Thinking about what chain of events could plausibly produce a two-stage increase in the acceleration rate, my guess would be:

1. Synthetic minds
2. Synthetic bodies

We’ll probably get advanced AI first, which will then help to produce advanced nanotechnology. In both cases, any shift is likely to occur when the engineered technology becomes broadly competitive with the existing natural one it is supplanting.

The new replicators will first build themselves minds, and then use those minds to build themselves bodies.

]]> By: Tim Tyler http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/06/the-conversatio.html#comment-401368 Tim Tyler Mon, 30 Jun 2008 20:52:39 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2008/06/the-conversation-so-far.html#comment-401368 What I actually said was that 52 more doublings after the next substantial increase in the growth rate seemed unlikely to happen - due to physical limitations. Even 16 doublings at Robin's 2.3 weeks per doubling is only 36.8 weeks - less than your average pregnancy. What I actually said was that 52 more doublings after the next substantial increase in the growth rate seemed unlikely to happen – due to physical limitations.

Even 16 doublings at Robin’s 2.3 weeks per doubling is only 36.8 weeks – less than your average pregnancy.

]]> By: Robin Hanson http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/06/the-conversatio.html#comment-401367 Robin Hanson Mon, 30 Jun 2008 14:14:50 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2008/06/the-conversation-so-far.html#comment-401367 Everyone, it is Tim, not I who predicted 52 doublings (or quadrillions)! I would only suggest that the next mode might plausibly see a similar number of doublings to the last few modes, i.e., six to sixteen. Unknown, cool picts! Everyone, it is Tim, not I who predicted 52 doublings (or quadrillions)! I would only suggest that the next mode might plausibly see a similar number of doublings to the last few modes, i.e., six to sixteen.

Unknown, cool picts!

]]> By: Unknown http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/06/the-conversatio.html#comment-401366 Unknown Mon, 30 Jun 2008 13:56:55 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2008/06/the-conversation-so-far.html#comment-401366 Zubon: at http://www.kokogiak.com/megapenny/eighteen.asp there is an image of one quintillion pennies, with a comparison with one quadrillion pennies, each drawn to scale with certain other familiar objects. Zubon: at http://www.kokogiak.com/megapenny/eighteen.asp there is an image of one quintillion pennies, with a comparison with one quadrillion pennies, each drawn to scale with certain other familiar objects.

]]> By: Zubon http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/06/the-conversatio.html#comment-401365 Zubon Mon, 30 Jun 2008 13:43:21 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2008/06/the-conversation-so-far.html#comment-401365 So we go to four quadrillion times in two years, and then things really start to pick up? Unless someone has a picture handy of what a quadrillion looks like, I think we are past the point where your meat brain substitutes "gazillion" when trying to think about what the numbers really mean, like 3^^^3. Whether or not we are uploaded, most value will be in the form of information by that point, or at least the information that is incorporated into the matter we are enjoying. But the real point of uploading has already been mentioned: to speed up Overcoming Bias posts. When we can directly connect brains and transfer information the way our computers do, we can get through the introductory explanations <em>much</em> more quickly. Perhaps non-biological post-humans will put great value on this discourse, and that will be the source of the octillion-dollar economy. (I suspect this is an audience that would get it if I made an obscure reference here to Oracle's digital telepathy line in Rock of Ages. Very obscure.) So we go to four quadrillion times in two years, and then things really start to pick up? Unless someone has a picture handy of what a quadrillion looks like, I think we are past the point where your meat brain substitutes “gazillion” when trying to think about what the numbers really mean, like 3^^^3. Whether or not we are uploaded, most value will be in the form of information by that point, or at least the information that is incorporated into the matter we are enjoying.

But the real point of uploading has already been mentioned: to speed up Overcoming Bias posts. When we can directly connect brains and transfer information the way our computers do, we can get through the introductory explanations much more quickly. Perhaps non-biological post-humans will put great value on this discourse, and that will be the source of the octillion-dollar economy.

(I suspect this is an audience that would get it if I made an obscure reference here to Oracle’s digital telepathy line in Rock of Ages. Very obscure.)

]]> By: Giedrius http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/06/the-conversatio.html#comment-401364 Giedrius Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:49:45 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2008/06/the-conversation-so-far.html#comment-401364 I could not help but paraphrase a little more. Let's suppose Robin and Eliezer are talking about explosions sometime in the past. Robin: I have analyzed most of the known ways to make an explosion. If you heat up a boiler, it explodes. If you put gunpowder into closed metallic container and heat it up, it explodes even more powerfully. Water is a single substance; gunpowder is a mixture of three substances. I have a theory, that if you make a mixture of FIVE substances and use it instead of gunpowder, you might get an even more powerful explosion. I have even proposed a recipe that might work. It involves a new substance, produced using nitric acid and some organic materials… Eliezer: I don't have time to talk, but I have a better idea. If you bring together two big pieces of radioactive material, you will get a really big explosion. If you get the details right, that is. Robin: Historical evidence does not support that. For all the known cases when two pieces of anything were brought together, explosion never occurred. But since you do not specify how hard it is to figure out the details of your explosion, why can't we think mine is more feasible? I could not help but paraphrase a little more.
Let’s suppose Robin and Eliezer are talking about explosions sometime in the past.

Robin: I have analyzed most of the known ways to make an explosion. If you heat up a boiler, it explodes. If you put gunpowder into closed metallic container and heat it up, it explodes even more powerfully. Water is a single substance; gunpowder is a mixture of three substances. I have a theory, that if you make a mixture of FIVE substances and use it instead of gunpowder, you might get an even more powerful explosion. I have even proposed a recipe that might work. It involves a new substance, produced using nitric acid and some organic materials…

Eliezer: I don’t have time to talk, but I have a better idea. If you bring together two big pieces of radioactive material, you will get a really big explosion. If you get the details right, that is.

Robin: Historical evidence does not support that. For all the known cases when two pieces of anything were brought together, explosion never occurred. But since you do not specify how hard it is to figure out the details of your explosion, why can’t we think mine is more feasible?

]]> By: Tim Tyler http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/06/the-conversatio.html#comment-401363 Tim Tyler Sun, 29 Jun 2008 08:44:12 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2008/06/the-conversation-so-far.html#comment-401363 Re: <EM>So maybe the first singularity could be caused by uploads, the second by AGI.</EM> Ah, the hypothetical uploads-before-AI scenario again. Has anyone ever articulated any coherent reasons for taking this idea more seriously than angels dancing on pinheads? Re: So maybe the first singularity could be caused by uploads, the second by AGI.

Ah, the hypothetical uploads-before-AI scenario again. Has anyone ever articulated any coherent reasons for taking this idea more seriously than angels dancing on pinheads?

]]> By: Tim Tyler http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/06/the-conversatio.html#comment-401362 Tim Tyler Sat, 28 Jun 2008 21:02:50 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2008/06/the-conversation-so-far.html#comment-401362 I found Robin's analysis of timing and speedup interesting, if pretty speculative - due to extrapolation from a tiny number of data points. But I thought the analysis of transition inequalities sucked. It wasn't even clear if Robin was counting AIs as people or not. I found Robin’s analysis of timing and speedup interesting, if pretty speculative – due to extrapolation from a tiny number of data points. But I thought the analysis of transition inequalities sucked. It wasn’t even clear if Robin was counting AIs as people or not.

]]> By: bbot http://www.overcomingbias.com/2008/06/the-conversatio.html#comment-401361 bbot Sat, 28 Jun 2008 20:23:27 +0000 http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2008/06/the-conversation-so-far.html#comment-401361 Zings abound! Best OCB post in years. Zings abound! Best OCB post in years.

]]>