[alancalverd]

Very few of our northern ancestors survived the ice age, and they did so by migrating, as did their predecessors during the previous hot period. No amount of AI is going to persuade humans to behave rationally, and there are now too many of us to permit significant migration without famine and war. Some will indeed survive, with or without AI, but it won't be pleasant.

[alancalverd]

If life also evolves somewhere else, they aren't guaranteed to have worms.

Life being a chemical process, if there is no means of recycling the waste of one life form via another, it is doomed to a very brief existence.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Very few of our northern ancestors survived the ice age, and they did so by migrating, as did their predecessors during the previous hot period. No amount of AI is going to persuade humans to behave rationally, and there are now too many of us to permit significant migration without famine and war. Some will indeed survive, with or without AI, but it won't be pleasant.

They survived nevertheless, whatever method they chosen.
AI can help to predict which methods have higher chance to succeed given the available data

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

If life also evolves somewhere else, they aren't guaranteed to have worms.

Life being a chemical process, if there is no means of recycling the waste of one life form via another, it is doomed to a very brief existence.

they don't have to be worms.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

That sounds like you would like to see the end of humanity and give the planet to the robots, does it not?

It seems like you're mistaken me with Alan. Although, he prefers worms instead of robots to replace humans.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Here's a more technical video but it's important to really understand what's going on "under the hood" of future AI.
Revealed: How Optimus Will LEARN--And REMEMBER! Monte Carlo, Q-Transformer, and LLMs!

In this fairly technical episode let's examine the evidence and discover just how Tesla's Optimus robot could be learning to do complex, "long horizon," sparse reward tasks like sorting blocks in practically no time at all! Whats more there is growing evidence that a natural language based interface (think ChatGPT style) might not only be a way to communicate with Teslabot, but a way for it to remember specific tasks for the future. Yes, this is a technical and geeky episode but it's important to really understand what's going on "under the hood" sometimes!

Moral questions are similar to "long horizon," sparse reward tasks. Finding the best possible decisions and actions for long term results requires neural networks with adequate depth and breadth, with optimal and efficient algorithms.

When the goal is already well understood, the problem of good and evil can be translated into problem of wisdom and ignorant.

[alancalverd]

It seems like you're mistaken me with Alan. Although, he prefers worms instead of robots to replace humans.

Not me, God. He gave worms dominion over everything except the bacteria that eat worms.

[alancalverd]

I think we all know what "children" means, but "universal", "wrong" and "harm" mean different things in different contexts.

I smell philosophy. But fortunately police officers, judges and jurors are not philosophers, and society, on the whole, works pretty well.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

It seems like you're mistaken me with Alan. Although, he prefers worms instead of robots to replace humans.

Not me, God. He gave worms dominion over everything except the bacteria that eat worms.

Some birds and moles also eat worms.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

I think we all know what "children" means, but "universal", "wrong" and "harm" mean different things in different contexts.

Are 17 years old humans children?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

I smell philosophy. But fortunately police officers, judges and jurors are not philosophers, and society, on the whole, works pretty well.

At some point, they also do philosophy, just not professionally. Some of us are amateur chess players, soccer players, gardeners, or fishers.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

What is effective altruism? Philosopher Peter Singer explains.

Effective altruism isn?t just for the rich. Philosopher Peter Singer shares how we can all be better at doing ?good.?
Peter Singer, author of "Famine, Affluence and Morality,? talks about the benefits of effective altruism and our moral obligation to help others.

Effective altruism focuses on raising the minimum living standards and encourages everyone, not just the wealthy, to give and find happiness in contributing to a better world. Singer breaks down the history of the effective altruism movement and shares the example of Zell Kravinsky, who donated most of his wealth and a kidney to a stranger, exemplifying the practice.

Singer also emphasizes the need to do thorough research before donating to any cause to ensure the greatest good.

About Peter Singer:

Peter Singer has been described as the world?s most influential philosopher. Born in Melbourne in 1946, he has been professor of bioethics at Princeton University since 1999. His many books include Animal Liberation - often credited with triggering the modern animal rights movement - Practical Ethics, The Life You Can Save, The Most Good You Can Do, and Ethics in the Real World. In 2023, he published Animal Liberation Now, a fully revised and updated version of the 1975 original.

Singer?s writings have also inspired the movement known as effective altruism, and he is the founder of the charity The Life You Can Save. In 2021 he was awarded the $1 million Berggruen Prize for Philosophy and Culture, which he donated to nonprofit organizations working for the causes he supports. In 2023 he received the Frontiers of Knowledge Prize for the Humanities, from the Spanish BBVA Foundation.

Just like any efforts, their effectiveness are measured by cost and benefit analysis. But what's not less important is defining the terminal goal of the effort.

[alancalverd]

At some point, they also do philosophy, just not professionally.

I don't. Nor do I take drugs or strangle cats.

[alancalverd]

What is effective altruism? Philosopher Peter Singer explains.

Excellent article in The New Statesman a couple of weeks ago, debunking EA as a front for naked capitalism and exploitation. And also attributing it to a British philosopher.

But disagreement is the whole point of philosophy. 

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

At some point, they also do philosophy, just not professionally.

I don't. Nor do I take drugs or strangle cats.

You are special then.
When people think about the reason why they do what they are doing, they are doing philosophy.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

What is effective altruism? Philosopher Peter Singer explains.

Excellent article in The New Statesman a couple of weeks ago, debunking EA as a front for naked capitalism and exploitation. And also attributing it to a British philosopher.

But disagreement is the whole point of philosophy. 

They are competing ideas against each other to find out the winner. So far, they haven't made a unanimous decision.
But similar things are also found in other fields. There's no single best way to treat cancer yet, or mitigate climate change. Unified field theory hasn't been discovered. There's still disputes about dark matter and energy.

[alancalverd]

When people think about the reason why they do what they are doing, they are doing philosophy.

A centipede was happy - quite!
Until a toad in fun
Said, "Pray, which leg moves after which?"
This raised her doubts to such a pitch,
She fell exhausted in the ditch
Not knowing how to run.

You do what you do (a) in order to achieve an objective that you consider desirable (voluntary action)  or (b) because that's how the body works (autonomic response).   

[alancalverd]

They are competing ideas against each other to find out the winner.

There being no definition of a winner, nor any rules of competition, the exercise has no value. It's even more pointless than psychology, and even less entertaining than golf.

In my undergraduate days I bought a typewriter from a chap who was giving up his PhD research in experimental psychology. I asked him why. He said "I do an experiment and publish the results and my explanation. A month later someone else does the same experiment, gets the same result, and derives a completely different explanation. Psychology is not a science."

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

There being no definition of a winner, nor any rules of competition, the exercise has no value. It's even more pointless than psychology, and even less entertaining than golf.

But we can point out the losers.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

In my undergraduate days I bought a typewriter from a chap who was giving up his PhD research in experimental psychology. I asked him why. He said "I do an experiment and publish the results and my explanation. A month later someone else does the same experiment, gets the same result, and derives a completely different explanation. Psychology is not a science."

It means that their researches are underdefined. It also happened in other fields of sciencescience, including AI. Almost no one would say that it is useless.