Comment by jazzyjackson
3 years ago
I attended Max's recent lecture at Harvard, where they were recruiting for their AI safety fellowship; a friend of mine captured a good video, 54 minutes:
I think it's a good approach, we should use AI to write proof carrying code. I think we'll want AI to do things beyond what we can prove is safe, but maybe we shouldn't.
I think some commenters here are being too dismissive, Max came across to me as a provacatuer, making proposals that are not sure things, but whose rebuttals will advance the field.
>Max came across to me as a provacatuer, making proposals that are not sure things, but whose rebuttals will advance the field
I think that's the problem with Tegmark. His curiosity and willingness to engage are attributes that make him a gift in the fields of science. They also make him a popular character in media, which let him make radical statements that are made to provoke and arouse curiosity, but end up being presented as the opinions of experts in the field, or even the consensus. In my opinion, the end result isn't always only positive.