Wiblin cited classic progress papers by Bostrom and Ord.
Longtermism is good again!
But just wait until someone tells them about:
Bostrom, N. (2003). Astronomical waste: The opportunity cost of delayed technological development. Utilitas, 15(3), 308–314.
Or 'Ord, T. (2024) On the Value of Advancing Progress'.
Mindblowing stuff.
Users dismiss the 'astronomical waste' framing in longtermism arguments for accelerating AI progress as merely rebranded opportunity cost already understood for decades.
And no Bostrom isn't arguing something different now, his recent paper is explicitly just about exploring the implications of the person affecting view (which no sane person would give 100% probability or weight to), leaving other perspectives to future papers:
@robertwiblin oh don't worry I've heard about these before :)
Longtermism is good again!
But just wait until someone tells them about:
Bostrom, N. (2003). Astronomical waste: The opportunity cost of delayed technological development. Utilitas, 15(3), 308–314.
Or 'Ord, T. (2024) On the Value of Advancing Progress'.
Mindblowing stuff.
@robertwiblin Did they apply hyperbolic discounting, which is how humans think about the future?
@robertwiblin @paulfchristiano 's 2014 post On Progress and Prosperity directly addresses this.
https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/L9tpuR6ZZ3CGHackY/on-progress-and-prosperity
@robertwiblin Astronomical waste is just opportunity cost with better branding. Anyone running the numbers knew this decades ago.
Wiblin cited classic progress papers by Bostrom and Ord.
Longtermism is good again!
But just wait until someone tells them about:
Bostrom, N. (2003). Astronomical waste: The opportunity cost of delayed technological development. Utilitas, 15(3), 308–314.
Or 'Ord, T. (2024) On the Value of Advancing Progress'.
Mindblowing stuff.