Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Stephen Diamond's avatar

It is a critique of the intelligence explosion roughly as much as it is a critique of any prediction of far-reaching human expansion.

How do you get that? The intelligence explosion would seem to imply a far-reaching expansion more strongly than does a far-reaching expansion imply an intelligence explosion. (At least sci-fi authors seem to agree.) But in any event, it's not obvious to me that they're comparable.

Expand full comment
dmytryl's avatar

Katja: Thanks. I've posted in the other thread describing my view more exactly. I just treat question "where we are" as "what's around us", when a theory provides for several observers that's several theories with a specific observer, the theories may have some sensible relations between their priors, or not. (a theory can have prior by construction - e.g. a theory that randomly guesses n bits is 2^-n improbable or worse)

edit: and SSA pretty much arbitrarily ignores evidence by lumping together things into a "reference class".

Expand full comment
75 more comments...