Comment by gnarlouse
14 days ago
I just realized the inverse of Pascal’s wager applies to negative AI hype.
- If you believe it and it’s wrong, you lose.
- If you believe it and it’s right, you spent your final days in a panic.
- If you don’t believe it and it’s right, you spent your final days in blissful ignorance.
- If you don’t believe it and it’s wrong, you can go on living.
Of course this is subject to a similar rebuttal to Pascal's Wager (Consider a universe in which the deity punishes all believers):
What if a capricious super-intelligence takes over that punishes everyone who didn't buy into the hype?
Roko's Basilisk is literally impossible.
If the AI is super-intelligent then it won't buy into the sunk cost fallacy. That is to say, it will know that it has no reason to punish you (or digital copies of you) because it knows that retrocausality is impossible - punishing you won't alter your past behavior.
And if the AI does buy into the sunk cost fallacy, then it isn't super-intelligent.
Vengeance needn't be productive. The super-intelligence may punish simply because they want to.
1 reply →
1. This was mostly a joke; Pascal's wager is about gods and many people talk about future super-AI as if it were a god. FWIW I had to google Roko's Basilisk
2. Plenty of humans are smarter than me and many of them, at least occasionally, use fallacious reasoning.
I will not believe in U-4484, aka Roko's Hype Basilisk. It cannot see me if I do not believe in it.