Increments - Episodes Tagged with “Existential Risk”

#77 (Bonus) - AI Doom Debate (w/ Liron Shapira)

Ben Chugg and Vaden Masrani — Tue, 19 Nov 2024 13:30:00 -0800

Back on Liron's Doom Debates podcast! Will we actually get around to the subject of superintelligent AI this time? Is it time to worry about the end of the world? Will Ben and Vaden emotionally recover from the devastating youtube comments from the last episode?

Follow Liron on twitter (@liron) and check out the Doom Debates youtube channel and podcast.

We discuss

Definitions of "new knowledge"
The reliance of deep learning on induction
Can AIs be creative?
The limits of statistical prediction
Predictions of what deep learning cannot accomplish
Can ChatGPT write funny jokes?
Trends versus principles
The psychological consequences of doomerism

Socials

Follow us on Twitter at @IncrementsPod, @BennyChugg, @VadenMasrani, @liron
Come join our discord server! DM us on twitter or send us an email to get a supersecret link
The world is going to end soon, might as well get exclusive bonus content by becoming a patreon subscriber here. Or give us one-time cash donations to help cover our lack of cash donations here.
Click dem like buttons on youtube

Was Vaden's two week anti-debate bro reeducation camp successful? Tell us at incrementspodcast@gmail.com

Special Guest: Liron Shapira.

Support Increments

#43 - Artificial General Intelligence and the AI Safety debate

Ben Chugg and Vaden Masrani — Sun, 28 Aug 2022 15:00:00 -0700

Some people think that advanced AI is going to kill everyone. Some people don't. Who to believe? Fortunately, Ben and Vaden are here to sort out the question once and for all. No need to think for yourselves after listening to this one, we've got you covered.

We discuss:

How well does math fit reality? Is that surprising?
Should artificial general intelligence (AGI) be considered "a person"?
How could AI possibly "go rogue?"
Can we know if current AI systems are being creative?
Is misplaced AI fear hampering progress?

References:

The Unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics
Prohibition on autonomous weapons letter
Google employee conversation with chat bot
Gary marcus on the Turing test
Melanie Mitchell essay.
Did MIRI give up? Their (half-sarcastic?) death with dignity strategy
Kerry Vaughan on slowing down AGI development.

Contact us

Follow us on Twitter at @IncrementsPod, @BennyChugg, @VadenMasrani
Check us out on youtube at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_4wZzQyoW4s4ZuE4FY9DQQ
Come join our discord server! DM us on twitter or send us an email to get a supersecret link

Which prompt would you send to GPT-3 in order to end the world? Tell us before you're turned into a paperclip over at incrementspodcast@gmail.com

Support Increments

#11 - Debating Existential Risk

Ben Chugg and Vaden Masrani — Wed, 16 Sep 2020 16:00:00 -0700

Vaden's arguments against Bayesian philosophy and existential risk are examined by someone who might actually know what they're talking about, i.e., not Ben. After writing a critique of our conversation in Episode 7, which started off a series of blog posts, our good friend Mauricio (who studies political science, economics, and philosophy) kindly agrees to come on the podcast and try to figure out who's more confused. Does Vaden convert?

We apologize for the long wait between this episode and the last one. It was all Vaden's fault.

Hit us up at incrementspodcast@gmail.com!

Note from Vaden: Upon relistening, I've just learned my new computer chair clicks in the most annoying possible way every time I get enthusiastic. My apologies - I'll work on being less enthusiastic in future episodes.

Second note from Vaden: Yeesh lots of audio issues with this episode - I replaced the file with a cleaned up version at 5:30pm September 17th. Still learning...

Support Increments

#7 - Philosophy of Probability II: Existential Risks

Ben Chugg and Vaden Masrani — Tue, 07 Jul 2020 11:00:00 -0700

Back down to earth we go! Or try to, at least. In this episode Ben and Vaden attempt to ground their previous discussion on the philosophy of probability by focusing on a real-world example, namely the book The Precipice by Toby Ord, recently featured on the Making Sense podcast. Vaden believes in arguments, and Ben argues for beliefs.

Quotes
"A common approach to estimating the chance of an unprecedented event with earth-shaking consequences is to take a skeptical stance: to start with an extremely small probability and only raise it from there when a large amount of hard evidence is presented. But I disagree. Instead, I think the right method is to start with a probability that reflects our overall impressions, then adjust this in light of the scientific evidence. When there is a lot of evidence, these approaches converge. But when there isn’t, the starting point can matter.

In the case of artificial intelligence, everyone agrees the evidence and arguments are far from watertight, but the question is where does this leave us? Very roughly, my approach is to start with the overall view of the expert community that there is something like a one in two chance that AI agents capable of outperforming humans in almost every task will be developed in the coming century. And conditional on that happening, we shouldn’t be shocked if these agents that outperform us across the board were to inherit our future. Especially if when looking into the details, we see great challenges in aligning these agents with our values."
- The Precipice, p. 165

"Most of the risks arising from long-term trends remain beyond revealing quantification. What is the probability of China’s spectacular economic expansion stalling or even going into reverse? What is the likelihood that Islamic terrorism will develop into a massive, determined quest to destroy the West? Probability estimates of these outcomes based on expert opinion provide at best some constraining guidelines but do not offer any reliable basis for relative comparisons of diverse events or their interrelations. What is the likelihood that a massive wave of global Islamic terrorism will accelerate the Western transition to non–fossil fuel energies? To what extent will the globalization trend be enhanced or impeded by a faster-than-expected sea level rise or by a precipitous demise of the United States? Setting such odds or multipliers is beyond any meaningful quantification."
- Global Catastrophes and Trends, p. 226

"And while computers have been used for many years to assemble other computers and machines, such deployments do not indicate any imminent self- reproductive capability. All those processes require human actions to initiate them, raw materials to build the hardware, and above all, energy to run them. I find it hard to visualize how those machines would (particularly in less than a generation) launch, integrate, and sustain an entirely independent exploration, extraction, conversion, and delivery of the requisite energies."
- Global Catastrophes and Trends, p. 26

References:
- Global Catastrophes and Trends: The Next Fifty Years
- The Precipice: Existential Risk and the Future of Humanity
- Making Sense podcast w/ Ord (Clip starts around 40:00)
- Repugnant conclusion
- Arrow's theorem
- Balinski–Young theorem