Message from @Xinyue

Discord ID: 527748315387789352


2018-12-27 07:20:17 UTC  

@Bee Third position does what was previously thought impossible and combines the worst aspects of the first two positions.

2018-12-27 07:20:24 UTC  

^^^^

2018-12-27 07:20:25 UTC  

it won't stay limited in it's application is the point as people see the benefits, adoption increases and adoptees replace non users

2018-12-27 07:20:32 UTC  

It can yes

2018-12-27 07:20:32 UTC  

lmao

2018-12-27 07:20:33 UTC  

easily

2018-12-27 07:20:46 UTC  

and neither can you prevent people from using those beneficial limited uses

2018-12-27 07:20:50 UTC  

you will never accomplish this

2018-12-27 07:21:12 UTC  

well, there is an element of inevitability yes

2018-12-27 07:21:30 UTC  

What you can do is argue for true AI ban because it is an existential threat

2018-12-27 07:21:38 UTC  

nootropics and limited use of gene-editing *isn't*

2018-12-27 07:21:44 UTC  

but that's not the point, you're making an active claim for this

2018-12-27 07:21:52 UTC  

without dealing with ethical concerns

2018-12-27 07:22:06 UTC  

I'm making an active claim that nootropics and gene-editing will be used, yes, and will yield certain outcomes.

2018-12-27 07:22:08 UTC  

Now,

2018-12-27 07:22:16 UTC  

humans are a species imbued with strong survival instinct

2018-12-27 07:22:33 UTC  

there's no reason to assume that strong AI research *must* in every scenario be a factor

2018-12-27 07:22:37 UTC  

```and neither can you prevent people from using those beneficial limited uses```

this

```nootropics and limited use of gene-editing isn't```

and this idea of *limited use* don't fit together

2018-12-27 07:22:52 UTC  

limited use, yes, which doesn't pose a risk

2018-12-27 07:22:57 UTC  

not all uses of gene editing pose a risk

2018-12-27 07:23:23 UTC  

to say that we *must* utilise the very dangerous applications is like saying that, due to the emergence of nuclear technology, we must instantly devolve into nuclear war

2018-12-27 07:23:23 UTC  

you won't be about to stop people from going beyond your set limits, by your own argument

2018-12-27 07:23:28 UTC  

you're being incoherent

2018-12-27 07:23:39 UTC  

uh, yes

2018-12-27 07:23:40 UTC  

ahahahaha

2018-12-27 07:23:52 UTC  

people will use the applications that are *utterly beneficial*

2018-12-27 07:24:03 UTC  

can you make a cogent argument why they would be super into existential threat applications?

2018-12-27 07:24:04 UTC  

no?

2018-12-27 07:24:11 UTC  

did you even read what i wrote?

2018-12-27 07:24:16 UTC  

i guess you're not interested

2018-12-27 07:24:16 UTC  

You aren't making sense

2018-12-27 07:24:21 UTC  

🤷

2018-12-27 07:24:24 UTC  

You are connecting points that don't connect

2018-12-27 07:24:26 UTC  

I've seen you do this before

2018-12-27 07:24:26 UTC  

you argue that,

2018-12-27 07:24:30 UTC  

as we use gene editing,

2018-12-27 07:24:31 UTC  

ok 😃

2018-12-27 07:24:35 UTC  

we'll end up somehow in AI dystopia

2018-12-27 07:24:42 UTC  

which is a tremendous non-sequitur

2018-12-27 07:25:01 UTC  

in fact! the improving of human cognitive capacity *reduces* need for AI

2018-12-27 07:25:01 UTC  

jfc