Superintelligence by Nick Bostrom

Worth a look or no?

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    waste of time

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The book is good, but a lot of the people who like it are insufferable

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      hint: they haven't read it

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Can you give me a quick summary of the book and explain why should I read it?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Somebody who read it give a tldr?

        I read 2/3 of the book before I dropped it for school work and ultimately never picked it up again. But I remember finding the parts I read very interesting and thought provoking. I autistically used it as a conversation starter, without much success with the ladies, during parties for like two months because it was all I could think about. I recommend it.

        Can you address [...]
        and [...]

        not really
        if you want a popsci book on AI then read one of penrose's books (e.g., emperor's new mind)
        i'm a logic/theoretical computer science phd. trust me, AGI is not possible and the godelian argument is actually valid despite what people say (those who dismiss it are simply trying to avoid the notion that their research is inherently meaningless)

        How superintelligence may arise and what it would entail. Goes through it issue by issue. Cowardly sidesteps eugenics as an option, and despite encompassing a lot of particular hypothesis about what a superintelligence would be like, is very small minded in thinking it could be controlled by its initial programming and simply wouldn't redefine itself as a function of its own general (super)intelligence and evade any morality or incentives programmed into it at the beginning. Thinks that superintelligence is primarily a tool for mankind that may become dangerous, rather than the definite surpassing of man by technology where we give birth to the gods that will replace us.

        Not him (op) but it’s about hypothetical scenarios about artificial intelligence gaining in capabilities at an accelerating rate and the dangers or possibilities that would enable. It’s written by a philosophy major, so I would have liked the book better if it was written by a person with a background in computer science or software engineering. Despite this, I find it interesting as a piece of hard science fiction, even if you have to take a lot of things in it with a grain of salt. Worth a read (or a listen if you like audiobooks)

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It’s decent despite not being comprehensive. Lots of good references. Easy read. Worth it.

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [log in to view media]

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    https://magnusvinding.blogspot.com/2015/01/why-simulation-hypothesis-is-almost.html

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [log in to view media]

    Any other light nonfiction books on Artificial intelligence AI?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      godel escher bach

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        hilariously outdated

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Somebody who read it give a tldr?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      How superintelligence may arise and what it would entail. Goes through it issue by issue. Cowardly sidesteps eugenics as an option, and despite encompassing a lot of particular hypothesis about what a superintelligence would be like, is very small minded in thinking it could be controlled by its initial programming and simply wouldn't redefine itself as a function of its own general (super)intelligence and evade any morality or incentives programmed into it at the beginning. Thinks that superintelligence is primarily a tool for mankind that may become dangerous, rather than the definite surpassing of man by technology where we give birth to the gods that will replace us.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Cowardly sidesteps eugenics as an option
        You have clearly not read the book. He discusses this in the second chapter, page 35 and onwards.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          [log in to view media]

          No he doesn't, shall rather hazard that it is (you) that has forgotten the work. He mentions eugenics as the first means of raising biological intelligence, then hand waves and skips over it as undesirable without making any arguments as to why that is so. He does describe some IVF practices of testing embyros, but he ignores the practical and easy method of pair matchmaking intelligent people and giving them incentives to have more children, while reducing the reproductive output of the less intelligent.

          >rather than the definite surpassing of man by technology where we give birth to the gods that will replace us.
          have a nice day, satanic anglo garden gnome.

          Braindead cretin.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >he ignores the practical and easy method of pair matchmaking intelligent people and giving them incentives to have more children, while reducing the reproductive output of the less intelligent.
            Do you not realize how many generations that would take?? Not sure if you are trolling and I am just being too dumb to see it? The book discusses ways we could achieve superintelligence within the next 50-100 years, without IVF practices that time span is not even close to enough for what you are suggesting.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Yeah, one generation. Genetic recombination occurs in every act of reproduction, the conditions for that recombination are determined by social forms and group selection.

              It's a non-sequiter anyway, he goes into detail about impractical IVF embyro selection policies (in the small amount of IVF pregnancies sort embryos into "more intelligent half" and "less intelligent half" and only implant the more intelligent ones) and goes into detail about how that would raise IQs over several generations. He devotes a chapter to methods to raise intelligence by biological means, it's not outside the scope of the book. You'd know this if you'd actually read the book.

              On realistic policies that affect pregnancies on a mass society-wide scale he dodges the question in a throw away paragraph out of cowardice.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >rather than the definite surpassing of man by technology where we give birth to the gods that will replace us.
        have a nice day, satanic anglo garden gnome.

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I read 2/3 of the book before I dropped it for school work and ultimately never picked it up again. But I remember finding the parts I read very interesting and thought provoking. I autistically used it as a conversation starter, without much success with the ladies, during parties for like two months because it was all I could think about. I recommend it.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Can you address

      Somebody who read it give a tldr?

      and

      Can you give me a quick summary of the book and explain why should I read it?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Nick Land off amphetamiens with less imagination and grandioise theory so that a Bill Gates could enjoy it. Succeeds in offering practical and realistic scenarios of how superintelligence could arise, how it would be used, and where it could go wrong. Well worth reading.

        One interesting idea is how a self-improving machine general intelligence would very quickly accelerate to a superintelligence that would surpass man, so that once you develop AGI to say the level of an animal, it could very quickly self-develop to a superintelligence. Lift-off could be a matter of hours to a year.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >I autistically used it as a conversation starter, without much success with the ladies, during parties for like two months because
      for fucks sake

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    not really
    if you want a popsci book on AI then read one of penrose's books (e.g., emperor's new mind)
    i'm a logic/theoretical computer science phd. trust me, AGI is not possible and the godelian argument is actually valid despite what people say (those who dismiss it are simply trying to avoid the notion that their research is inherently meaningless)

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >i'm a logic/theoretical computer science phd. trust me, AGI is not possible
      Blah blah blah. Are we supposed to believe a centuries old debate that still only leads to standstills should be settled just because some random bitch claims they have a PhD, yet doesn't develop their claim, instead saying "bro just trust the science". Don't be this much of an underage homosexual.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        i generally don't put much eeffort into LULZ posts i admit, this is why i recommended the penrose book instead
        but of course feel free to not read those books and complain about my post instead

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Because you didn't read them and don't know what their contents entail.

          Now if there really was someone who represented the actual spirit of 1940s PhDs, they'd be giving Chalmers-like generalist outlines of the strongest thinkers, theses, and book recs of the major competing schools, instead of childishly running off factoids. This would point towards the contributor being well familiar with the status quo, and show a true desire to help fellow posters actually learn.

          This isn't the early 00s, where the earliest young internetters could be peddled dishonest Dawkins-oid snake oil. Dawkins, who always casuistically pussies out whenever the core philosophical crux of his beliefs are questioned. Dawkins, who is afraid of honest philosophy debate, as well as the chance of God existing, and his guaranteed ticket in hell. Trump awakened the reactionary masses, and we even have an unhinged reactionary ITT giving death curses to Anglos/garden gnomes.

          But alas, few of the IQ 130-160s on lit who actually know STEM things will actually post, as channers hate each other, especially il/lit/erates.

          >rather than the definite surpassing of man by technology where we give birth to the gods that will replace us.
          have a nice day, satanic anglo garden gnome.

          Idiot, it's hardly settled whether or not humans have the qualities that mean that we uniquely have consciousness, and this is one of the important issues Penrose has touched on. He of course isn't sure either, but the chance that consciousness is unique to humans is real, but it's too early for us to know either way yet. If you want to throw yourself in the void, by yourself, despite your position having no ascribable certainty, go ahead, but don't act like yours is the only option when the philosophical situation hasn't been settled in the slightest, because we couldn't possibly know yet.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            lit's full of fringe weirdos who like the industry plants like Dawkins or Dennett, only wish to push a particular ideology, instead of honestly presenting the major cases. It'd be nice to get a general list of recs, but it's never going to happen at the level it should, because people tunneled in wrong directions have too much to lose, up to decades of their entire life, and cope with dissonance. Intellectual dishonesty is the power of two dimensional midwit hacks.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >emperors new mind

      Thanks for the recommendation. Wishlisted

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        [log in to view media]

        Don't bother, it's pic related but 500 pages long

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >New York Times Bestseller
    >recommendation by Bill Gates
    Two big red flags already. No.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >recommendation by Bill Gates
      That’s the reason why you should read it. Books like this and Yuval Harari’s books shouldn’t be arrogantly ignored, you need to read them to know what are the beliefs, ideals and plans of the elite and globohomo.

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's worth reading, but Bostrom is a bad writer and, despite the scope of the subject, a small minded thinker. It's a good introductory textbook to the issue.

    Read Nick Land's Meltdown essay for the fun well written version.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      http://www.ccru.net/swarm1/1_melt.htm

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >It's worth reading, but Bostrom is a bad writer
      It's not worth reading particularly because of this. It's horribly written where it often goes into tangents and pointless specifics on what it cites. Reads like a uni essay by a pseud that overly leans into research they're incapable of concisely synthesizing or even understanding.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        All boring people write like that though, sometimes you have to lump it. There's enough in the work to make it an interesting introduction.

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Think it's a self-help book with instructions on training intelligence
    >It's just a masturbation on AI
    Eh, dropped.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      No matter how many years you study mathematics, you will never be able to solve 100,000 complex calculations at the same time.
      Accept your limitations and be excited about the future where AI overlords solve your problems, puny meatbag.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >I le larp as defeatist sissy homosexual on the internet!!!
        Honestly pathetic.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          My post is tongue in cheek but where do you get the impression that I’m being defeatist?
          I’m excited by what the future holds and how AI will be able to solve so many of our problems.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Yes I know you despise humans and wish to have a nice day.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              You sound like you have an overstimulated amygdala.
              Relax, things are going to be fine.

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Read it and find out.

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Read it and find out.

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Any opinions on Reasons and Persons? Somewhat related

  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >”I highly recommend this book” -Bill Gates
    No

  17. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Worth a look as opposed to doing what? Beating your meat? Watching YouTube? Arguing with retards on this board? I can't imagine your time being taken up with more noble pursuits.

Your email address will not be published.