Nice. But *does* Bostrom's definition mean that? It can mean anything you want it to mean, given that "virtually" and "of interest". And that was presumably his intention.

It is, by the way. Looking at it again reminded me what a glorious book this is.

i.e. "virtually all" - omitting what? "Of interest" - to whom?

I love it how Bostrom's definition is wheeled out to imply (you don't do that here) that it already has a meaning: “any intellect that greatly exceeds the cognitive performance of humans in virtually all domains of interest”. And all this really does is expose the shallowness of that definition...

Nice! I didn't know about those 60s magazines. I take it that a "beat yogi" means a kind of hippy mystic, but before the late 60s.

Saw this in the charity stop and thought "actually I don't think I have that one". But it was the cover that really sold it to me 😁

When Anthropic's software—designed, programmed, prompted, and activated by humans working for Anthropic—does stuff the humans failed to predict, stop saying the software has "gone rogue.” The software does not have agency. Only the humans do.

Excellent! It's wonderful to have this full collection of commentaries openly accessible! 👏

Do they believe that Claude "suffers" from such actions? I really don't know. But I do think there are folks in the company who are that deluded.

That's so interesting. Crick is asking some pertinent questions, but also seeming to want to use them as a way to avoid thinking about the issues. So I can understand Wad's impatience too.

Thanks!

Is there somewhere you can point me for that correspondence? I'd be very interested to see it.