There are far more dissenting opinions in this sub than people keep saying.

Submitted by Krillinfor18 t3_zu89ed in singularity

I agree that this sub can be a bit of an echo chamber, which is concerning, but there are a lot of people here with conflicting viewpoints. However, many of these posts only have derision to offer rather than meaningful discussion.

We are optimistic. That doesn't mean we don't allow criticism, or that we are not open to being wrong.

People can make posts without an argument or point other than to say they are excited. If you disagree with a specific point this person makes than say so, but don't belittle or demean others simply for expressing enthusiasm.

If you just don't like optimism there are plenty of other subreddits out there that may be a better fit for you, such as r/Futurology.

Let's try to create a welcoming and respectful community here, even if we don't always agree with each other.

77

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

AsuhoChinami t1_j1hpby2 wrote

Definitely. There's a healthy amount of people on both sides. The self-proclaimed realists and skeptics just go "omg dis is such an echo chamber!!!!111111 REEEEEEEEEEEEE" because the other side annoys them so much that their presence gets built up in their mind as being greater than it actually is. A 50 percent demographic can feel like 99 percent when you wish that it was a zero percent demographic.

25

Ortus12 t1_j1k5euh wrote

It's because they have no solid arguments, they have to resort to ad hominem attacks to poison the well.

It's pure emotion driving their thought process because they don't want to get their hopes up.

Not only here, but this debate has been going on for decades about exponential vs linear progress, and the linear progress people see the world looking the same as ten years ago and that's enough for them. The ones who see what's actually happening see an exponential increase in computation with no signs of stopping that's set to dwarf all of the computation of all human brains in the next few decades.

It's logic vs emotional thinking.

0

SumpCrab t1_j1kmoru wrote

It's not about if the singularity will happen but about whether the benefits are going to be shared. I think it is a bit naive to believe that the singularity is going to solve all problems and not create any problems. Just because you can imagine the solutions does not mean effort will be applied fairly. In the future, sure, but there is going to be a transition period, and there will be people caught in the margins, as they always are.

I like this sub because I like to keep up with developments, I wasn't aware this place is only for those who drank the kool-aid.

6

Ortus12 t1_j1kojx2 wrote

I agree. It is the most disruptive technology mankind will ever invent.

The transition period has already started and real unemployment is already climbing. I wouldn't be surprised if more people are dying on the streets.

People who make the argument, the masses will riot without jobs and over-throw the rich, don't realize ASI can be used to control the masses easily. Even modern corporate funded media and propaganda do a good job at that.

We could be starving, choose to sign up for the military because we are lead to believe most people are doing well, the military is safe, the military is doing something good, then sent off to a meat grinder war in wave after wave to get rid of us.

What happens depends on a very small group of people, and what they want. Everything could turn out great with UBI and all of that, but before we could even get to that point AI is an amplification force for capitalism and an amplification force for a small group of extremely rich people who already have all of the data and money to make most effective use of Ai.

3

yerawizardmandy t1_j1i1oxi wrote

I read r/singularity, r/futurology, and r/collapse. It’s all happening at once

25

WarImportant9685 t1_j1j7luw wrote

r/controlproblem is more heavily regulated if I'm not wrong. It's more about alignment theory

6

sneakpeekbot t1_j1j7mw6 wrote

Here's a sneak peek of /r/ControlProblem using the top posts of the year!

#1: I gave ChatGPT the 117 question, eight dimensional PolitiScales test | 46 comments
#2: Computers won't be intelligent for a million years – to build an AGI would require the combined and continuous efforts of mathematicians and mechanics for 1-10 million years. | 9 comments
#3: This from the GPT2 simulator | 6 comments

^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^Contact ^^| ^^Info ^^| ^^Opt-out ^^| ^^GitHub

2

AdditionalPizza t1_j1ij4zi wrote

Which differing opinions are you referring to? Optimistic vs pessimistic outcomes of the singularity or believers vs non-believers?

The first former I think is fine, and hopefully can remain civil with discussions. The latter though, if you don't think there's an impending singularity then I don't understand why they'd even be in this sub.

15

Borrowedshorts t1_j1i2uv9 wrote

My honest opinion is that those who are optimistic about the singularity don't truly understand it. Your entire life and everything you know will be entirely upended. The pace of change will be greater and hit with more ferocity than we can even comprehend. Maybe you think your life sucks now and the singularity will somehow make it better, but it will truly be an alien world from everything you now know.

14

Krillinfor18 OP t1_j1i6xfe wrote

This position intuitively makes sense, but i don't agree.

I don't believe there is any reason to think any of us will be forced to adopt new technological advances beyond what we are comfortable with. Nobody is going into Amish communities and forcing them use cellphones.

It will probably be a bit scary to live next door to a god-like being that used to be a person, but we will have the autonomy to choose how much of that technology we want to integrate into our own lives, like we always have.

6

ThePokemon_BandaiD t1_j1itbed wrote

That doesn’t mean it won’t cause serious societal upheaval in the meantime

5

Fe_Ubermens t1_j1mtrav wrote

I think this is plainly incorrect just from observing the general history of civilization. As technology progresses, society at large shifts around the emerging accepted tech, so even previously “mundane” or “standard” things become integrated into the new paradigm. Without a phone, computer, or car, the average person would struggle immensely, yet all of these tools are optional in the most worthless and impractical sense of the word.

1

Frumpagumpus t1_j1ju1hw wrote

i think there are a lot of aspects of it you can anticipate even if it is incredibly alien, you might not be right about everything but you will probably be right about some things.

its quite possible to speculate about cultural changes that might arise from near lightspeed communication, thinking at 5 gigahertz, brain encryption, software brain cloning, software brain merging even though those are all alien scenarios to our current daily lives, you can draw boundaries around the space of possibilities and you might be right about them.

i have no idea what comes after a dyson swarm but I doubt it will be finished (assuming no ai ruin, which you can also speculate about) sooner than a hundred and fifty years, maybe even 500 years from now which is pretty far out.

4

Maleficent_Cloud5943 t1_j1jb7xl wrote

You’re speaking as though you already know what the outcome is going to look like. You might as well pull out some tarot cards and a crystal ball while you’re at it. All we have are shifting, estimated probabilities that vary wildly from person to person, whether they’re experts of completely ignorant of the topic. If you believe that all the variables going into those probabilities are static, and therefore there can only be one possible outcome, do you really think that corresponds with what we already know about how things work?

Black-and-white thinking is considered a cognitive distortion for a reason. It's rampant even in so-called “intellectuals,” because it makes reality more palatable. But almost everything about reality resides in a gray area--especially enormous concepts like the singularity. All the variables are in flux, and our decisions and actions *now* will have an impact on the outcome. Sure, we all know that positive actions can sometimes result in negative outcomes, and vice-versa, but there is a much greater tendency for positive actions to result in positive outcomes. The more people who are trying to create a positive outcome to the singularity, the greater our chances are at realizing that outcome; whereas, if everyone just throws their hands up in the air and declare that we’re all doomed, then we’re tipping the probabilities in that direction. I choose the former. We should all be fighting tooth and nail to create a positive outcome.

1

WarImportant9685 t1_j1l4y6m wrote

Bruh, he literally said he doesn't know what will be the future after singularity.

How can you say that he claims he is speaking as though he knows the future?

2

Maleficent_Cloud5943 t1_j1l9j2j wrote

He didn't even imply that. Wtf are you talking about?! Borrowedshorts literally said “those who are optimistic about the singularity don't truly understand it.”

2

Professional-Song216 t1_j1hxwc3 wrote

This sub is full of “I’m better than you” people, that’s the actual issue.

12

Fe_Ubermens t1_j1mrqwm wrote

Literally. Genuinely so many pretentious “I’m logical ur emotional checkmate” brainlets in one place

0

TopicRepulsive7936 t1_j1jpv59 wrote

If you're wrong about something every single day of your life and it doesn't weigh on you, damn right I'm better than you.

−1

AndromedaAnimated t1_j1ht5k0 wrote

Thank you! You say the truth here. Let’s kick the elitist pessimists in the ass.

  • signed : former elitist pessimist trying to reconsider my approach
7

DukkyDrake t1_j1ihagt wrote

No one can really know what the future will be like, different people have certain hopes framed by some limited set of variables and some IMO desperation. I may include/exclude other variables and starting conditions leading to a different framing. There are many possible futures, but somethings are more likely than others.

7

Ortus12 t1_j1k4uhn wrote

A few other Biases that effect people's thinking

  • Linear Thinking - Rather than seeing all the feedback loops and exponential progress in areas such as energy and computational costs. These people ignore all of the data graphs and trends and instead use this shallow limited imagination.
  • Pro Aging Trance - Afraid to get ones homes up for full aging reversal treatments, so you choose to imagine that aging is more complex than we could ever figure out in your life time.
  • Anthropocentrism - thinking humans are special and that because our intelligence is complex, it can't be the result of a simple algorithm scaled up
  • Unrealistic Pessimism - Because of fear of getting ones hopes up.
6

WarImportant9685 t1_j1l4lx2 wrote

You are missing some biases that's on the optimistic camp brother

  • Techno-religiousity -> Simple believe that any progress on technology is ultimately good.
  • Unrealistic optimism -> Some might call this hopium
  • Intelligence anthromorphism -> Believe that intelligent agent would be similar to human
1

Wassux t1_j1lk7c5 wrote

How can progress on technology not be good? I mean even the nuclear bomb has created more peace than ever. And saved millions of lives by nuclear energy

2

WarImportant9685 t1_j1lr2tx wrote

I think the correct view is that each technology should be evaluated on its own. And cannot be blanket viewed as good. I'd agree with technology in general is good. But I'd disagree with claims along the line of 'all technological progress is good'. I understand that most people are looking at heuristic reasons why technological progress is good. And I would agree that humanity history is the history of technological progress.

But it's dangerous to say that AGI is good because technology progress is good.

And I kinda disagree with your comments about nuclear weapon. Fact is we are lucky that USA get nuclear weapon first instead of germany. I viewed nuclear weapon as force multiplier instead of good or evil.

And I viewed unaligned AGI as evil. While aligned AGI as force multiplier.

More intuitively, throughout history, we mostly got technology that is still smaller than life. Fire, wheels, masonry, etc. The issue is that right now our tech have started to become larger than life, starting with nuclear and likely larger than the whole humanity with AGI.

1

Wassux t1_j1ncrx3 wrote

So you'd rather have world war continue instead of stop by the invention of the nuclear weapon?

And ofcourse each technology should be evaluated on it's own. But I can't think of anything that has been purely negative if you take a heuristic view. Which is the correct way to view it I think.

And yes hypothetically unaligned agi could be bad, but I can't imagine a scenario where that will happen. And that's why I think all technological progress is good, since it is worked on by the brightest minds we have, and they simply haven't dropped the ball yet. And I don't see a reason to expect they will in the future.

2

WarImportant9685 t1_j1nfl62 wrote

Frankly, I don't know. Cause nuclear is a grey area tho. In one hand it cause peace on modern times. On the other hand there is always the threat of extinction by nuclear winter.

But let's leave nuclear for a second. I can give you an example of a technological progress where humanity dropped the ball. Usage of CFC refrigerant which damages ozone layer. While it's cool that humanity have banned CFC refrigerant as of now, it takes 20 years for the treaties that banned it (Montreal protocol) to be created from the discovery of the problem.

My point is, humanity is great at advancing tech, but maybe not so much at advancing tech safely. I think at least people should take seriously that aligned AGI is not a guaranteed matter. And instead of getting defensive, ideally more people would want to help alignment research to make sure unaligned AGI not be deployed.

1

Wassux t1_j1nzlyl wrote

But isn't the technological advancement there that we figured out that it has a bad effect on the ozone layer?

1

WarImportant9685 t1_j1o0t41 wrote

Yes, that's why I don't want to say AGI is bad either. But rather, we need to tread carefully about AGI and consider each possibility. Rather than wholly believe it will be good

1

Fe_Ubermens t1_j1mql6c wrote

First sensible r/singularity comment I’ve ever seen lmao

1

darudesandstrom t1_j1ipnc6 wrote

> We are optimistic. That doesn't mean we don't allow criticism, or that we are not open to being wrong.

Being overly optimistic does kind of make this sub immune to certain criticisms that involve the possibility of a bleak outlook for humanity post singularity.

7

WarImportant9685 t1_j1j86g1 wrote

yeah I agree. I tried to be respectful in my discussion on how bleak outcome might be possible. That it might not be sunshine and rainbows if singularity is achieved.

To put it frankly, people don't like it.

4

SmoothPlastic9 t1_j1ho39p wrote

I feel like this sub is 50% optimistic about AI and 50% hating on other people who doesnt like AI

6

WarImportant9685 t1_j1ii252 wrote

nah bro, the people that are optimistic about AI also posts ad hominem attacks to people who doesn't like AI. It's mud wrestling now.

Have you seen the post that call artist neo-luddites, saying straight up he doesn't care if artists lose their jobs? It got tons of upvotes here

10

SmoothPlastic9 t1_j1is4wu wrote

I dont really like when this sub does that yeah cuz theyre acting like its a crime to hate on something which might have a negative impact on the entire human race

2

NarrowTea t1_j1iwaea wrote

This is the fairest and most well deserved ""echo-chamber"" in all of reddit at least compared to the other ones. I wouldn't even call this an echo chamber especially when you get into to politics where people war there political alignment into their personal identity and become tribalistic. There are very good reasons to be optimistic since technology has a major historical tendency of exploding very rapidly.

3

nebson10 t1_j1lbgj0 wrote

Can confirm, I'm here for the hype train.

2

sheltojb t1_j1komt1 wrote

I think that the learning algorithm is preventing a lot of people from seeing the dissenting opinions. You've got to teach the learning algorithm that you're interested in variety and diversity, which takes purposeful effort to do.

1

TheHamsterSandwich t1_j1vh19d wrote

goes on singularity subreddit

"agi will never exist dumbass."

refuses to elaborate

leaves

1

AzerFox t1_j1hl6l1 wrote

I would bet the majority of the subscribers here are not college educated scientists.

−15

Krillinfor18 OP t1_j1hm5hq wrote

"However, many of these posts only have derision to offer rather than meaningful discussion."

I can have the opinion that climate change is really happening, even though i'm not a collage educated climate scientist. because I listened to collage educated climate scientists who say it is really happening.

I can have the opinion that the singularity is a real possibility even though i'm not a collage educated computer scantiest. Because i listened to collage educated computer scientists who say it's a real possibility.

14

Desperate_Donut8582 t1_j1htnok wrote

Why would you think scientist would be a majority in a Reddit subreddit?

3

AzerFox t1_j1ia54f wrote

I literally said the opposite... reading comprehension.

−1

AndromedaAnimated t1_j1htf2n wrote

And I bet that if you ARE an educated scientist, that you are then also a sufferer of narcissist personality disorder. But you probably aren’t and only pretend. Do you even understand how low-brow your comment sounds? F*cking COLLEGE. Science is only science if you are a university educated scientist. /s

Please forgive me the provocation, I am trying to use sarcasm to hold up a mirror for you. I don’t really think you have NPD. Peace ✌️

2