Soyweiser

joined 2 years ago
[–] Soyweiser@awful.systems 14 points 1 month ago

Gentlemen, you can't have spirited discussions here about the techbros breaking the world, this is the forum were we move fast and break things.

[–] Soyweiser@awful.systems 7 points 1 month ago

Miners lung on the moon.

[–] Soyweiser@awful.systems 7 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I think it isnt just toxic but also sharp, and some of the toxics might be water soluble, so could contaminate whatever water they bring, and contaminate the air. (And iirc the moon is worse but at least they are not planning a base there. Right?).

[–] Soyweiser@awful.systems 13 points 1 month ago (2 children)

People must believe there is a plan, as the alternative 'I was conned by some asshole' is too much to bear.

[–] Soyweiser@awful.systems 3 points 1 month ago

Well, if they tell it what to do to cheat the ai is still artificially intelligent. Checkmate noprompter!

[–] Soyweiser@awful.systems 5 points 1 month ago

No, the typewriters are supposed to be random, this is guided based on previous work, so a whole space of output becomes extremely unlikely (so without looking at math for it, those spaces would show up very rarely if you then ran the infinite monkey experiment infinite times).

[–] Soyweiser@awful.systems 7 points 1 month ago

Let the Wookie win.

[–] Soyweiser@awful.systems 2 points 1 month ago

So, you want to replace the guys with beertap backpacks with robots? Because this already exists without robots.

[–] Soyweiser@awful.systems 5 points 1 month ago

The power of these people us that they project a field in which normal reality doesn't seem to hold and they can do things that seem to distort reality. Like a clown car. The Great Clown theory of history.

[–] Soyweiser@awful.systems 12 points 1 month ago (3 children)

That is a lot of mental hoops to jump through to keep holding on to the idea IQ is useful. High IQ is a force multiplier for being dumb. The horseshoe theory of IQ.

[–] Soyweiser@awful.systems 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Not something you should admit on the internet, but I actually have not watched that much of the simpsons, it just wasn't that much on our tvs. Bundy was however.

[–] Soyweiser@awful.systems 16 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Ow wait you weren't asking me to explain what I meant, you were asking me to defend the correctness of the professors in genetics vs a crackpot at an event where I wasn't, nor am I qualified as im not a professor in genetics, nor is Yud, after I just mentioned that I don't think unqualified people are talking about this. So you were trying the Socratic method? How is that working out for you?

The text you’ve just quoted

Yes, and im quoting the LW crackpot, they are not saying they are unwittingly wrong, it is hinting at that they are intentionally wrong. (Using some very dodgy analogies (no making a chicken bigger isn't like creating a 14 foot human that is a crazy comparison due to the whole thing in biology where stuff works differently at different scales (see also the strength of ants), it is powerful hype language however) and unscientific shit (the random asspulled graphs)). Also note that his whole article is using their fears of AI to promote that we should do more eugenics (using the weirdest logic imaginable, we should take care not to make mistakes and do everything slow in AI so we need to do eugenics fast) and that the professors are wrong/keeping back. And this is just what I can come up with after quickly skimming parts of the article (I don't have the time/energy/expertise to do more anyway, I mean imagine if I had to look up all the literature they reference and see if it is correct (all 5 of them, I mean you did notice that there were only ~5 links to actual scientific articles right? Not an amount of backing I would want to base my political actions on (you also noticed that right?))). It also hits classic crankery levels, not only are the professors missing/suppressing something this thing is also a revolutionary thing which could save humanity. (also note he admits that the technology of editing babies on one gene is not solved yet (but they are close). Which should make you wonder why they are dismissive of 'ethical issues').

It also doesn't help that your reactions are pattern matching the 'im just curious, could you explain yourself' kind of person we used to get on r/sneerclub who 90% of the times wasn't curious but actually was just very pro race science or an annoying contrarian debatebro with yt induced brain damage (which got them banned very quickly, so word of warning).

E: and ow, you did notice that people in the comments are trying to say they should the guy who was recently famous for being able to keep his arm down into this right? (Fucking Ents who are pretending that the rest of the world doesn't affect them).

view more: ‹ prev next ›