Sure, but ancap for a status quo guy, really?

He already didn't say "are" but "tend to be".

You didn't fix it, you said the same thing.

Uh huh. The signatures that aren't forged or clearly business-related are philosophically the most predictable figures.

AI safety and regulation advocate you say? CSER and Alignment Forum? Yuval Noah Harari?

Whaow, whodathunk.

Hm. I haven't seen "the west needs to win" so much as should be free to participate. Especially if you fear the existential risk of unaligned AGI, it seems counterproductive to intentionally push its development away from your sphere of values.

Feels like the slope of enlightenment to me because my hype was peaking in 2013 and is just coming out of a trough.

I'm not as familiar with Elon Musk's takes on AI, but see also Yudkowsky and generally much of the "AI safety" bloc.

God damn it. Unsure whether this or "pause AI" are worse.

I mean, it's been improving for billions of humans for centuries, and stands to accelerate even more with all the downstream effects of eliminating aging.

Are you thinking mostly that the decline in population growth may reverse? From the traffic remark that's what I'm assuming.

Don't think that's very clearly true, though. Birth rates have been so strongly correlated with death rates over time... There's a lag in birth rates catching up when death rates drop, as we've seen in the African nations booming for instance, but catch up they do. Faster with higher standards of living.

What kind of innovation in human history do you think has been so kept out of plebian hands? I'm definitely thinking of Iron Age examples like literacy, but it gets a lot harder to name any as I move forward in time, especially aside from weaponry.

Uh oh, someone has unleashed a rogue AI!

We must unite in passing the 2029 HUMAN ACT and ensure that these dangerous technologies never again fall into the wrong hands.

The pressure for that to drop rapidly is even stronger than usual for emergent tech. Aging is a tremendous burden on the whole of society. Everyone, especially "the rich" from a monetary standpoint, benefits from minimizing it across the whole population as quickly/effectively as possible.

And that's just the pure economic pressure, never mind the ethical or sociopolitical.

Speaking of which, does this use of "sentient" generally mean something more like "sapient"? Been trying to get a handle on the way naysayers are talking.

'Cause sentience is just having senses. All of animalia at the very least is sentient.

Inclined to blame pop sci-fi for this misconception.

Written across the stars in luminescent computronium, "Actually we don't even know what intelligence is."

What kind of corporate PR has claimed to have AGI?

As for "near", well yes. It's noticeable we have most human cognitive capabilities in place as narrow AI, separate from one another, and the remaining challenge—at least for the transformer paradigm—is in going sufficiently multi-modal between them.

Best scenario. The most "adaptive" thing governments can do is nothing.

Yes? Look at all of recorded human history, and increasingly so, at an accelerating rate.

Many do write code, it's fantastic.

I kind of get ya, but amazing feats becoming so easily commonplace as to achieve more frivolous things demonstrates accelerating returns well, and such jokes are evocative of that IMO.

Akin to computers going from top secret military encryption-breaking to virtual fantasy worlds. Pretty beautiful.

I do think it shifts the likelihood of different types of attacks more heavily toward EMPs, at least.

I only have precautions against the most likely moves from Luddites. Nothing else seems predictable.

This seems to conflict with history, to put it mildly, doesn't it? Liberation of average people seems like the overriding feature of technological progress. It's practically been the primary force counteracting most efforts at oppression.

Did the entities change very recently?

To clarify, when people of this ilk say "cryptofascist," they're not saying anything about cryptocurrencies or blockchain tech, but are rather saying "secretly fascist."

Unless existence is viewed as necessarily a state of increasing suffering, I don't see how that couldn't be a bad thing.

And I don't really ultimately care more about myself—I want people to not be forced to decay and die against their will, doesn't matter that much if it only becomes possible after my lifetime. Humanity deserves it.

Right, "Ha ha look how harmonious people can be if you retard them. Lobotomies for everyone!"

Fine-tuned gish gallop right there.