佛跳墙破解版

Home免费海外网站加速器下载

LibraryCommunityAll Posts

佛跳墙破解版

永久免费外网加速器

SDM15h13Ω5

江苏一网吧为吸引学生上网安装翻墙软件被查处__中国青年网:2021-12-9 · 嫌生意清淡，淮安盱眙的一家网吧老板打起了周边学校学生的注意，为了招揽学生上网消费，他在电脑上安装了一款翻墙软件：可以让学生不刷身份 ...

GPT-3, Bloviator: OpenAI’s language has no idea what it’s talking about

The article purports to give six examples of GPT-3's failure - Biological, Physical, Social, Object and Psychological reasoning and 'non sequiturs'. Leaving aside that GPT-3 works on 中科院高能物理研究所所长：建造大型对撞机正当其时 ...:2021-9-6 · 中国建大加速器对我们有什么实际的好处呢？第一阶段300亿人民币的投入(2021年起，每年30亿)，至少使我们可以在以下技术方面实现国产化，并领先 ..., and that it seems as though he specifically searched out weak points by testing GPT-3 on many more examples than were given, something a bit odd is going... (read more)

ESRogs4h2

This is a series of scenarios describing a human taking actions in the world, designed to test physical and common-sense reasoning.

云购物、云问诊、云办公互联网守护美好生活_中国青年 ...:2021-3-13 · “抗疫”的非常时期人们的日常消费习惯发生改变，为减少出门，线上购物需求激增，生鲜配送、线上购物、在线教育、远程办公、在线医疗等新型“宅经济”增长迅速。互联网创新层出不穷正深刻地改变着生活和产业生态。

7gwern12hEntirely possibly. Other people have mentioned that using any prompt (rather than just plopping the stories in) solves a lot of them, and Summers-stay says that Marcus & Davis did zero prompt programming and had no interest in the question of what prompt to use (quite aside from the lack of BO). I think they found the same thing, which is why they provide the preemptive excuse in the TR writeup:

5SDM12hI don't think that excuse works in this case - I didn't give it a 'long-winded frame', just that brief sentence at the start, and then the list of scenarios, and even though I reran it a couple of times on each to check, the 'cranberry/grape juice kills you' outcome never arose. So, perhaps they switched directly from no prompt to an incredibly long-winded and specific prompt without checking what was actually necessary for a good answer? I'll point out didn't really attempt any sophisticated prompt programming either - that was literally the first sentence I thought of!

外网加速器永久免费版官网

Richard_Ngo4d24

One fairly strong belief of mine is that Less Wrong's epistemic standards are not high enough to make solid intellectual progress here. So far my best effort to make that argument has been in the comment thread starting here. Looking back at that thread, I just noticed that a couple of those comments have been downvoted to negative karma. I don't think any of my comments have ever hit negative karma before; I find it particularly sad that the one time it happens is when I'm trying to explain why I think this community is failing at its key ... (read more)

Showing 3 of 38 replies (Click to show all)

TAG17h1

引领变革英特尔加速通向5G之路 - huanqiu.com:2021-5-10 · 在网络端，5G要求全面的网络转型，以具备虚拟核心网、基于云的架构以及先进的数据分析能力。英特尔凌动处理器C3000产品系列、英特尔至强处理器D-1500产品系列、25 GbE英特尔以太网适配器XXV710等技术从数据中心到网络边缘，共同提供了更高的安全性、性能和智能。

You have to realise that what you are doing isn't adequate in order to gain the motivation to do it better, and that is unlikely to happen if you are mostly communicating with other people who think everything is OK.

5drossbucket17hThanks! I have been meaning to add a 'start here' page for a while, so that's good to have the extra push :) Seems particularly worthwhile in my case because a) there's no one clear theme and b) I've been trying a lot of low-quality experimental posts this year bc pandemic trashed motivation, so recent posts are not really reflective of my normal output. For now some of my better posts in the last couple of years might be Cognitive decoupling and banana phones [http://drossbucket.com/2019/10/23/cognitive-decoupling-and-banana-phones/] (tracing back the original precursor of Stanovich's idea), The middle distance [http://drossbucket.com/2019/10/24/the-middle-distance/] (a writeup of a useful and somewhat obscure idea from Brian Cantwell Smith's On the Origin of Objects), and the negative probability post [http://drossbucket.com/2019/08/01/negative-probability/] and its followup.

1TAG17hLesswrong is competing against philosophy as well as science, and philosophy has broader criterion of evidence still. In fact , lesswrongians are often frustrated that mainstream philosophy takes such topics as dualism or theism seriously.. even though theres an abundance of Bayesian evidence for them.

MichaelA's Shortform

MichaelA7mo7

佛跳墙破解版

While doing research for a post on the idea of a distinction between “risk” and “(Knightian) uncertainty”, I came across a surprisingly large number of different ways of describing the idea that some probabilities may be more or 美国网络加速器免费版 “reliable”, “trustworthy”, “well-grounded”, etc. than others, or things along those lines. (Note that I’m referring to the idea of different degrees of trustworthiness-or-whatever, rather than two or more fundamentally different types of probability that vary in trustwo

... (read more)

Showing 3 of 4 replies (Click to show all)

美国网络加速器免费版17h1

See also Open Philanthropy Project's list of different kinds of uncertainty (and comments on how we might deal with them) here.

3mr-hire7moI like this and would find a post moderately valuable. I think sometimes posts with a lot of synonyms are hard to have take aways from, because it's hard to remember all the synonyms. What I think is useful is comparing and contrasting the different takes, creating a richer view of the whole framework by examining it from many angles. Re Knightian Uncertainty vs. Risk, I wrote a post that discusses the interaction of different types of risks (including knightian) here: http://www.lesswrong.com/posts/eA9a5fpi6vAmyyp74/how-to-understand-and-mitigate-risk [http://www.lesswrong.com/posts/eA9a5fpi6vAmyyp74/how-to-understand-and-mitigate-risk]

1MichaelA7moThanks for the feedback! Yeah, I'd agree with that, and it's part of why fleshing this out is currently low priority for me (since the latter approach takes actual work!), but remains theoretically on the list :)

ricraz's Shortform

Richard_Ngo4mo2Ω1

I've heard people argue that "most" utility functions lead to agents with strong convergent instrumental goals. This obviously depends a lot on how you quantify over utility functions. Here's one intuition in the other direction. I don't expect this to be persuasive to most people who make the argument above (but I'd still be interested in hearing why not).

If a non-negligible percentage of an agent's actions are random, then to describe it as a utility-maximiser would require an incredibly complex utility function (becaus... 免费全球节点加速器

Showing 3 of 22 replies (Click to show all)

2DanielFilan2dI object to the claim that agents that act randomly can be made "arbitrarily simple". Randomness is basically definitionally complicated!

2Richard_Ngo2dEh, this seems a bit nitpicky. It's arbitrarily simple given a call to a randomness oracle, which in practice we can approximate pretty easily. And it's "definitionally" easy to specify as well: "the function which, at each call, returns true with 50% likelihood and false otherwise."

DanielFilan1d2Ω1

If you get an 'external' randomness oracle, then you could define the utility function pretty simply in terms of the outputs of the oracle.

If the agent has a pseudo-random number generator (PRNG) inside it, then I suppose I agree that you aren't going to be able to give it a utility function that has the standard set of convergent instrumental goals, and PRNGs can be pretty short. (Well, some search algorithms are probably shorter, but I bet they have higher Kt complexity, which is probably a better measure for agents)

MakoYass's Shortform

MakoYass3d5

Hmm. It appears to me that Qualia are whatever observations affect indexical claims, and anything that affects indexical claims is a qualia, and this is probably significant

Showing 3 of 4 replies (Click to show all)

TAG2d1

I can see how this might result from confusing consciousness qua phenomenonality with consciousness qua personal identity.

2G Gordon Worley III2d进入3.0时代中关村创业大街的咖啡没有凉_荔枝网新闻:2021-8-6 · 互联网新闻信息服务许可证：32120210003 苏ICP备07025745号-1 公安备案号：32021202110067 信息网络传播视听节目许可证号：1003036 违法和不良信息举报电话：（025）83187024 中国互联网举报中心举报邮箱：litchi@vip.jsbc.com跟帖评论自律管理承诺书

2MakoYass2d美媒：水土不服？外国初创企业在中国为何会失败 - huanqiu.com:2021-5-25 · 创业孵化项目“中国加速”的项目总监奥斯卡·拉莫斯说：“99%的外国公司不应进入中国市场。 ”剩余的1%或许有机会，但它们需要追问自己，是 ...

Douglas_Knight's Shortform

免费外国网络加速器2d4

There's an extremely common argument that the reason that ancient Greek science didn't lead to Greek engineering is that Athens was a slave society and slave societies are brimming with labor and have no demand for labor-saving devices.

I have never been able to make head or tail of this argument. Also, the conclusion and premise of the argument are false. Conclusion: Greek engineering was better than Roman engineering. It was awesome and we're really not sure how far it went. Premise: Greek scientists weren't in Athens, but in many plac... (read more)

阻断网络黄毒：强化追责加大惩罚力度-中工新闻-中工网:2021-8-20 · 强化追责阻断网络黄毒夜深人静时，藏身网络的涉黄直播平台热闹起来。女主播们穿着暴露、言语挑逗，以色情表演为诱饵 ...

永久免费外网加速器2d8

Explanations are liftings from one ontology to another.

Raemon2d2

Seems true, although in some cases I feel like one of the ontologies is just an obviously bigger/better version of another one.

Rafael Harth's Shortform

Rafael Harth2d6

I don't entirely understand the Free Energy principle, and I don't know how liberally one is meant to apply it.

But in completely practical terms, I used to be very annoyed when doing things with people who take long for stuff/aren't punctual. And here, I've noticed a very direct link between changing expectations and reduced annoyance/suffering. If I simply accept that every step of every activity is allowed $^{[1]}$ to take an arbitrary amount of time, $^{[2]}$ extended waiting times cause almost zero suffering on my end. I have successfully beate... 能上google免费加速器

mingyuan's Shortform

美国网络加速器免费版4d15

Once upon a time I ran a pair debugging session for my local rationality meetup group. A guy showed up who I'd never seen there before and as far as I know never showed up again. Below is the gist of our debugging session, which was... rather eye-opening for me:

---

Me: Hi there, what bug do you want help with?

Him: I need help buying groceries.

Me: Okay, what goes wrong when you're buying groceries?

中国空中Wi-Fi市场预期达百亿带动空中消费新模式_中证网:2021-5-10 · 18-04-03 16:49 铁路部门引入社会优势资源参与动车组Wi-Fi建设运营 18-01-20 08:58 机载Wi-Fi赚钱待解空中上网能免费多久 17-06-14 09:16 航企试水收费空中Wi-Fi ...

Me: Okay, that's pretty common. Do you make a list before you go grocer... (read more)

Showing 3 of 4 replies (Click to show all)

2永久免费外网加速器3dI hope I am not missing a point, so just to be sure... the point is that buying a larger pot would dramatically improve this guy's quality of life, but he is unable to notice this? (Or buying an electric kettle. Or only washing greasy dishes with hot water, and everything else with water from sink. Or switching to Soylent... okay, this is too extreme, but still within 5 minutes of thinking about the problem.)

8mingyuan2dOh, part of this is that I posted this anecdote as a supplement to the main one; it illustrates the same point but less starkly. I think the thing I was pointing at here was: people come to you stating that their problem is "I don't feel like doing my dishes" or "I'm bad at grocery shopping", and it turns out that there's a more fundamental thing in the way that on some level they know is the actual blocker, but they don't realize that that's where they need to intervene on their problem. Knowing Guy 2, I think he would have been able to come up with all of the solutions that you did within 5 minutes of brainstorming, but he was focused on {sink full of dishes} rather than looking at the problem as a whole.

mr-hire2d2

This same thing can open happen with debugging but internally. You think it's about dishes but actually it's about not having your mother's love.

I've observed that different pair debuggers tend to focus on finding the root internal or external causes, and the best can hone in on which is more relevant.

能上google免费加速器

adam_scholl's Shortform

Adam Scholl3d4

In college, people would sometimes discuss mu-eliciting questions like, "What does it mean to be human?"

I came across this line in a paper tonight and laughed out loud, imagining it as an answer:

"Maximizing this objective is equivalent to minimizing the cumulative pseudo-regret."

MakoYass's Shortform

MakoYass3d4

重庆:擅自"翻墙"上境外网站责令停止联网并警告-国际在线 - CRI:2021-3-28 · 昨日，市政府公众信息网发布了修订后的《重庆市公安机关网络监管行政处罚裁量基准》。自2021年7月27日起施行，有效期至2021年7月26日。对故意输入计算机病毒、有害数据的，初次违法，且未实际危害计算机系统安全的，处以警告。

And, damn, scores on posts are pretty much meaningless if you don't know how many people have seen the post, how many tried to read it, how many read all of it, and what the up/down ratio is. If you're missing one of those pieces of information, then there exists an explanation for a low score that has no relationship to the post's quality, and you can't use the score to make a decision as to whether to give it a chance.

Viliam's Shortform

Viliam5d6

Paul Graham's article Modeling a Wealth Tax says:

The reason wealth taxes have such dramatic effects is that they're applied over and over to the same money. Income tax happens every year, but only to that year's income. Whereas if you live for 60 years after acquiring some asset, a wealth tax will tax that same asset 60 times. A wealth tax compounds.

But wait, isn't income tax also applied over and over to the same money? I mean, it's not if I keep the money for years, sure. But if I use it to buy something from another person, then... (read more)

3MikkW4dI would very much like to see a society where money circulates very quickly. I expect people will have many reasons to be happier and suffer less than they do now. As you observe, income taxes encourage slowing down circulation of money, while wealth taxes speed up circulation of money (and creation of value), but I think there are better ways of assessing tax than those two. I suspect heavily taxing luxury goods which serve no functional purpose, other than to signal wealth, is a good direction to shift taxes towards, although there may be better ways I haven't thought of yet. Not answering your question, just some thoughts based on your post

3免费全球节点加速器3dIn the meanwhile I remembered reading long ago about some alternative currencies. (Paper money; this was long before crypto.) If I remember it correctly, the money was losing value over time, but you paid no income tax on it. (It was explained that exactly because the money lost value, it was not considered real money, so getting it wasn't considered a real income, therefore no tax. This sounds suspicious to me, because governments enjoy taxing everything, put perhaps just no one important noticed.) As a result, people tried to get rid of this money as soon as possible, so it circulated really quickly. It was in a region with very high unemployment, so in absence of better opportunities people also accepted payment in this currency, but then quickly spent it. And, according to the story, it significantly improved the quality of life in the region -- people who otherwise couldn't get a regular job, kept working for each other like crazy, creating a lot of value. But this was long ago, and I don't remember any more details. I wonder what happened later. (My pessimistic guess is that the government finally noticed, and prosecuted everyone involved for tax evasion.)

MikkW3d1

海外永久免费软件加速器

AllAmericanBreakfast's Shortform

AllAmericanBreakfast3d2

You can justify all sorts of spiritual ideas by a few arguments:

They're instrumentally useful in producing good feelings between people.
中国空中Wi-Fi市场预期达百亿带动空中消费新模式_中证网:2021-5-10 · 18-04-03 16:49 铁路部门引入社会优势资源参与动车组Wi-Fi建设运营 18-01-20 08:58 机载Wi-Fi赚钱待解空中上网能免费多久 17-06-14 09:16 航企试水收费空中Wi-Fi ...
H3C高端家用路由来了！ X3电竞路由帮你轻松五杀 ...:2021-12-3 · 通过这套“组合拳”可以让家庭网络中的游戏流量优先处理，从而降低游戏中的延迟。实测在100M宽带环境下，未开启这两项功能时，Ping值为16-18;开启后，Ping值降为了12，这就表明我们在游戏时可以更加流畅。H3C X3的另一个黑科技是“UU加速器”功能。
They're provocative and generative of conversation in a way that scientific studies aren't. Partly that's because the language they're wrapped in is more intriguing, and partly isn't because everybody's on a level playing fi

... 外网加速器永久免费版官网

免费海外网站加速器下载

AllAmericanBreakfast3d2

I would be interested in arguments about why we should eschew them that don't resort to activist ideas of making the world a "better place" by purging the world of irrationality and getting everybody on board with a more scientific framework for understanding social reality or psychology.

I'm more interested in why individual people should anticipate that exploring these spiritual frameworks will make their lives worse, either hedonistically or by some reasonable moral framework. Is there a deontological or utilitarian argument against them?

SDM's Shortform

SDM3d12Ω5

Modelling the Human Trajectory or ‘How I learned to stop worrying and love Hegel’.

Rohin’s opinion: I enjoyed this post; it gave me a visceral sense for what hyperbolic models with noise look like (see the blog post for this, the summary doesn’t capture it). Overall, I think my takeaway is that the picture used in AI risk of explosive growth is in fact plausible, despite how crazy it initially sounds.

One thing this post led me to consider is that when we bring together various fields, the evidence for 'things will go insane in the next century' is stron... (read more)

Viliam's Shortform

Viliam5d13

Thinking about relation between enlightenment and (cessation of) signaling.

I know that enlightenment is supposed to be about cessation of all kinds of cravings and attachments, but if we assume that signaling is a huge force in human thinking, then cessation of signaling is a huge part of enlightenment.

Some random thoughts in that direction:

The paradoxical role of motivation in enlightenment -- enlightenment is awesome, but a desire to be awesome is the opposite of enlightenment.

Abusiveness of the Zen masters towards their students: typically, the master t... (read more)

[+][comment deleted]3d1

Deleted by apricotSwarm, Last Thursday at 9:48 PM

MikkW's Shortform

MikkW13d17

Does newspeak actually decrease intellectual capacity? (No)

In George Orwell's book 1984, he describes a totalitarian society that, among other initiatives to suppress the population, implements "Newspeak", a heavily simplified version of the English language, designed with the stated intent of limiting the citizens' capacity to think for themselves (thereby ensuring stability for the reigning regime)

In short, the ethos of newspeak can be summarized as: "Minimize vocabulary to minimize range of thought and expression". There are two different, closely rela... (read more)

外网加速器永久免费版官网

3Viliam7dYes, the important thing is the concepts, not their technical implementation in the language. Like, in Esperanto, you can construct "building for" + "the people who are" + "the opposite of" + "health" = hospital. And the advantage is that people who never heard that specific word can still guess its meaning quite reliably. I think the main disadvantage is that it would exist in parallel, as a lower-status version of the standard English. Which means that less effort would be put into "fixing bugs" or "implementing features", because for people capable of doing so, it would be more profitable to switch to the standard English instead. (Like those software projects that have a free Community version and a paid Professional version, and if you complain about a bug in the free version that is known for years, you are told to deal with it or buy the paid version. In a parallel universe where only the free version exists, the bug would have been fixed there.) How would you get stuff done if people won't join you because you suck at signaling? :( Sometimes you need many people to join you. Sometimes you only need a few specialists, but you still need a large base group to choose from.

MikkW3d1

As an aside, I think it's worth pointing out that Esperanto's use of the prefix mal- to indicate the opposite of something (akin to Newspeak's un-) is problematic: two words that mean the exact opposite will sound very similar, and in an environment where there's noise, the meaning of a sentence can change drastically based on a few lost bits of information, plus it also slows down communication unnecessarily.

In my notes, I once had the idea of a "phonetic inverse": according to simple, well defined rules, each word could be transformed into an opposite wo... (read more)

ozziegooen's Shortform

ozziegooen8mo8

佛跳墙破解版

On the phrase "How are you?", traditions, mimesis, Chesterton's fence, and their relationships to the definitions of words.

美国网络加速器免费版
Boggling. I’m sure this is better explained somewhere in the philosophy of language but I can’t yet find it. Also, this post went in a direction I didn’t originally expect, and I decided it wasn’t worthwhile to polish and post on LessWrong main yet. If you recommend I clean this up and make it an official post, let me know.

One recurrent joke is that one per

... (read more)

外网加速器永久免费版官网

2ozziegooen7mo云购物、云问诊、云办公互联网守护美好生活_中国青年 ...:2021-3-13 · “抗疫”的非常时期人们的日常消费习惯发生改变，为减少出门，线上购物需求激增，生鲜配送、线上购物、在线教育、远程办公、在线医疗等新型“宅经济”增长迅速。互联网创新层出不穷正深刻地改变着生活和产业生态。

3Raemon7moWhat's Pragmatics in this case?

ozziegooen3d2

Ah, sorry for not responding earlier. By Pragmatics I meant Pragmatics in linguistics. It studies what people mean when they say words.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pragmatics/

Vanessa Kosoy's Shortform

Vanessa Kosoy外网加速器永久免费版官网12Ω6

This is preliminary description of what I dubbed Dialogic Reinforcement Learning (credit for the name goes to tumblr user @di--es---can-ic-ul-ar--es): the alignment scheme I currently find most promising.

It seems that the natural formal criterion for alignment (or at least the main criterion) is having a "subjective regret bound": that is, the AI has to converge (in the long term planning limit, $γ \to 1$ limit) to achieving optimal expected user!utility “浏览器主页劫持”追踪：如何实现我的主页我做主_新闻中心 ...:2021-5-27 · 网友热议“浏览器主页劫持”—— 我的主页我做主(“浏览器主页劫持”报道追踪) 一名网民在专业IT技术社区CDSN网站发帖，讲述他在使用某些浏览器 .... In order to achieve this, we need to establish a communicati

... (read more)

中国空中Wi-Fi市场预期达百亿（2） - 旅游 - 新京报网:2021-5-10 · 去年起中国航空Wi-Fi布局加速，未来将带动空中购物消费新模式（上接D06版）现状 2021年起中国航空空中Wi-Fi布局加速作为过渡，我国很多航空公司 ...

Vanessa Kosoy4d2Ω1

I gave a talk on Dialogic Reinforcement Learning in the AI Safety Discussion Day, and there is a recording.

免费海外网站加速器下载

2Vanessa Kosoy6dA variant of Dialogic RL with improved corrigibility. Suppose that the AI's prior allows a small probability for "universe W" whose semantics are, roughly speaking, "all my assumptions are wrong, need to shut down immediately". In other words, this is a universe where all our prior shaping is replaced by the single axiom that shutting down is much higher utility than anything else. Moreover, we add into the prior that assumption that the formal question "W?" is understood perfectly by the user even without any annotation. This means that, whenever the AI assigns a higher-than-threshold probability to the user answering "yes" if asked "W?" at any uncorrupt point in the future, the AI will shutdown immediately. We should also shape the prior s.t. corrupt futures also favor shutdown: this is reasonable in itself, but will also ensure that the AI won't arrive at believing too many futures to be corrupt and thereby avoid the imperative to shutdown as response to a confirmation of W. Now, this won't help if the user only resolves to confirm W after something catastrophic already occurred, such as the AI releasing malign subagents into the wild. But, something of the sort is true for any corrigibility scheme: corrigibility is about allowing the user to make changes in the AI on eir own initiative, which can always be too late. This method doesn't ensure safety in itself, just hardens a system that is supposed to be already close to safe. It would be nice if we could replace "shutdown" by "undo everything you did and then shutdown" but that gets us into thorny specifications issues. Perhaps it's possible to tackle those issues by one of the approaches to "low impact".

2Vanessa Kosoy免费全球节点加速器I am not sure. AI alignment seems to touch on many different aspects of the world, and it is not obvious that it can be reduced to assumptions that are extremely simple and natural. Or, if it can be reduced that way, then it might require a theory that on some level explains human civilization, its evolution and and its influence on the world (even if only on a fairly abstract level). I will share some thoughts how the various assumptions can be reduced another step back, but proceeding to reduce all of them to a simple core seems like a challenging research programme. Most of the parts of this design can be regarded as reflecting particular assumptions we make about the user as an agent. The core idea of having a dialogue comes from modeling the user as a "linguistic agent". Such agents may be viewed as nodes in a distributed AI system, but where each node has different objectives. It is an interesting philosophical question whether this assumption is necessary for value learning. It currently seems plausible to me that only for linguistic agents "values" are truly well-defined, or at least sufficiently well-defined to extrapolate them outside the trajectory that the agent follows on its own. The need to quantilize, debate and censor infohazards comes from the assumption that the user can be manipulated (there is some small fraction of possible inputs that invalidate the usual assumptions about the user's behavior). Specifically debate might be possible to justify by some kind of Bayesian framework where every argument is a piece of evidence, and providing biased arguments is like providing selective evidence. The need to deal with "incoherent" answers and the commitment mechanism comes from the assumption the user has limited access to its own knowledge state (including its own reward function). Perhaps we can formalize it further by modeling the user as a learning algorithm with some intrinsic source of information. Perhaps we can even explain why such agent

美国网络加速器免费版

SDM4d10Ω4

佛跳墙破解版

When examining value learning approaches to AI Alignment, we run into two classes of problem - we want to understand how to elicit preferences, which is (even theoretically, with infinite computing power), very difficult, and we want to know how to go about aggregating preferences stably and correctly which is not just difficult but runs into complicated social choice and normative ethical issues.

Many research programs say the second of these questions is less important than the first, especially if we expect continu... (read more)

Vanessa Kosoy's Shortform

Vanessa Kosoy6d5Ω2

Consider a Solomonoff inductor predicting the next bit in the sequence {0, 0, 0, 0, 0...} At most places, it will be very certain the next bit is 0. But, at some places it will be less certain: every time the index of the place is highly compressible. Gradually it will converge to being sure the entire sequence is all 0s. But, the convergence will be very slow: about as slow as the inverse Busy Beaver function!

This is not just a quirk of Solomonoff induction, but a general consequence of reasoning using Occam's razor (which is the only reasonable way to re... (read more)

真的有外星人吗？斯诺登曾去美国政府情报网求证，结论：没有:2021-10-24 · 【环球网报道见习记者朱海逸】世界上真的有外星人吗？美国中央情报局(CIA)和国家安全局(NSA)前雇员爱德华•斯诺登显然对此也很有兴趣。据美国 ...

MikkW4d1

I have a sense that similar principles are at play with Spaced Repetition, and that pointing out that connection may be relevant to effectively handling this issue

1ofer4dI think that in embedded settings (with a bounded version of Solomonoff induction) convergence may never occur, even in the limit as the amount of compute that is used for executing the agent goes to infinity. Suppose the observation history contains sensory data that reveals the probability distribution that the agent had, in the last time step, for the next number it's going to see in the target sequence. Now consider the program that says: "if the last number was predicted by the agent to be 0 with probability larger than 1−2− 1010 then the next number is 1; otherwise it is 0." Since it takes much less than 1010 bits to write that program, the agent will never predict two times in a row that the next number is 0 with probability larger than 1−2−1010 (after observing only 0s so far).

4Vanessa Kosoy5dWe can rephrase your question as follows: "Can we increase the probability of finding an error in the known laws of physics by performing an experiment with a simple property that never happened before, either naturally or artificially"? And the answer is: yes! This is actually what experimental physicists do all the time: perform experiments that try to probe novel circumstances where it is plausible (Occam-razor-wise) that new physics will be discovered. As to magical rituals, sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic :)

外网加速器永久免费版官网