Vitalik Buterin
@vitalik.eth
To me, the most underrated counterargument to the Pascal's Wager is that it ignores that your actions can have consequences on either side of zero. Once you take that into account, many things move from "seeming no-brainer" to "totally undecidable omg what the heck do I do"
30 replies
86 recasts
486 reactions
Vitalik Buterin
@vitalik.eth
(And yes, like all Pascal's Wager discourse in the 2020s, this has an AI safety tie-in. Soooo many actions done in the name of AI safety so far seem to have had very ambiguous consequences (Premise: all the other AI labs are reckless, I'll make one that focuses on safety! 2 years later: we have n+1 reckless AI labs))
4 replies
22 recasts
207 reactions
Stefan.eth
@stefanko
Hello, I have a question for you, how was your time in Ukraine or did you like it here? We were glad to see you)✨
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
cz12345
@cz12345
well
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Mo
@meb
n+1 reckless AI safety labs inevitably reminds of this relevant XKCD
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Brown
@crimsonking
Which Black Mirror episode do you see becoming our future?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
jenny.degen 🎩🟣
@cryptojenny
It's a paradoxical situation, indeed. The well-intentioned creation of AI safety-focused labs can inadvertently contribute to the very risks they aim to mitigate by increasing the overall number of AI projects. Striking a balance between innovation and safety is more crucial than ever. 🤖⚖️
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
assayer
@assayer
IMHO what you are talking about is not AI safety activity at all, it is a parasitic startup strategy 1) preach about AI safety 2) accumulate the capital, build the team 3) join the race and discard the safety I’m worried they are all the same Sama, Elon, and now Ilya it is like BP personal carbon footprint campaign, the opposite what it pretends to be
0 reply
1 recast
1 reaction
