🔥The 9th Round of Easy Loan, Earn $40 Reward is in progress❗️ ⏰ Promotion Period: January 15th - Feburary 15th, 2025 👉 Register now and check more details at gate.io/campaigns/358

Motion in belief-space is similar to motion in physics-space. If the rate of change in your environment’s dynamics is faster than your system is capable of learning you’ll get left behind. If the change accelerates too fast, your internal system will lose structural integrity.

The blindingly obvious proposition is that a fully independently recursive self-improving AI would be the most powerful [tool or being] ever made and thus also wildly dangerous. The part that can be reasonably debated is how close we are to building such a thing.

There’s nothing like posting a conditional proposition to the timeline to reassure me that many people cannot, in the general case, understand conditional statements.

Same trick that evolution uses to make things, same trick that we use to train an LLM. Way, way, way more reps than you’d reasonably expect.

There’s a lot of alpha in taking metaphors way more seriously

I propose Goofus and Gallant contrastive prompting: Goofus argues with the user over their choice of terminology Gallant doesn’t correct the user over their choice of terminology, even if it’s not the terms Gallant would use

Suffering is only suffering if it comes the clinging dynamic of the belief manifold, otherwise it’s just sparkling masochism.