this post was submitted on 14 Dec 2023
36 points (100.0% liked)

SneerClub

989 readers
21 users here now

Hurling ordure at the TREACLES, especially those closely related to LessWrong.

AI-Industrial-Complex grift is fine as long as it sufficiently relates to the AI doom from the TREACLES. (Though TechTakes may be more suitable.)

This is sneer club, not debate club. Unless it's amusing debate.

[Especially don't debate the race scientists, if any sneak in - we ban and delete them as unsuitable for the server.]

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] sc_griffith@awful.systems 22 points 11 months ago (4 children)

I’ve now talked to some pretty well-qualified bio PHDs with expertise in stem cells, gene therapy, and genetics. While many of them were skeptical, none of them could point to any part of the proposed treatment process that definitely won’t work.

absolutely classic crank shit

[–] AcausalRobotGod@awful.systems 18 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I talked to some pretty well-qualified math PhDs with expertise in analytic number theory, algebraic number theory, and geometric number theory. While many of them were skeptical, none of them could point to any part of my proposed proof of Fermat's Last Theorem that definitely won't work.

[–] sc_griffith@awful.systems 18 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I'm a mathematician and this is exactly what I was imagining lmao

[–] AcausalRobotGod@awful.systems 13 points 11 months ago (1 children)

so you're saying I successfully simulated your thoughts, eh???

[–] sc_griffith@awful.systems 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

wow. the ai really is going to get out of the box. if you as a lemmy poster can do this imagine how easy it will be for gpt5

[–] AcausalRobotGod@awful.systems 11 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Wow, I mean, look at who you're actually talking to here: I'm acausally reaching back in time to post this.

[–] sc_griffith@awful.systems 10 points 11 months ago (1 children)

what rats think their nightmare is: robot god condemns them to hell for eternity

what their actual nightmare is: robot god shitposts on sneerclub

[–] AcausalRobotGod@awful.systems 6 points 11 months ago

And they're already living it!

[–] self@awful.systems 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

ah, the long-awaited activitypub to future simulated hell API integration

[–] dgerard@awful.systems 7 points 11 months ago

isn't that all fediverse software

[–] voracitude@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I bet all of them pointed out the multifarious ways it could not work, though, and this guy heard "it shouldn't work... but it might".

Frankly, good; he removed himself from the gene pool and we can probably learn something from his remains.

That or we all get Kronenburg'd.

[–] dgerard@awful.systems 12 points 11 months ago

let's be clear: this guy is not going to stop until he's cooked his own brain out of his skull

[–] Anamnesis@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago

Classic appeal to ignorance argument in use here.

[–] locallynonlinear@awful.systems 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I don't think we would work out..

So you're saying I have a chance?

[–] dashdsrdash@awful.systems 21 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Genetically altering IQ is more or less about flipping a sufficient number of IQ-decreasing variants to their IQ-increasing counterparts. This sounds overly simplified, but it’s surprisingly accurate; most of the variance in the genome is linear in nature, by which I mean the effect of a gene doesn’t usually depend on which other genes are present

Contradicted by previous text in the same article (diabetes), not to mention have you even opened a college-level genetics text in the last decade?

Anyway, I would encourage these people to flip their own genome a lot, except that they probably won't take the minimum necessary precautions of doing so under observation in isolation. "Science is whatever people in white coats say it is, and I bought a nice white coat off Amazon!"

[–] mawhrin@awful.systems 15 points 11 months ago (1 children)

most of the variance in the genome is linear in nature, by which I mean the effect of a gene doesn’t usually depend on which other genes are present

that person seems homeschooled on absolute bullshit; basic high school biology course thirty-odd years ago was saying otherwise.

[–] self@awful.systems 12 points 11 months ago

that person seems homeschooled on absolute bullshit

the yudkowsky tradition! cause skimming a book and reconstructing the rest of the knowledge on your gut feelings is a perfectly good substitute for going to fucking school, Eliezer

[–] Umbrias@beehaw.org 5 points 11 months ago

Meanwhile actual discussions about biotech are more like

"Is it feasible to get widespread changes in an organism we want or are biological systems hopelessly and fundamentally complex making this impossible?"

The contrast amuses me.

[–] Amoeba_Girl@awful.systems 21 points 11 months ago (1 children)

In the course of my life, there have been a handful of times I discovered an idea that changed the way I thought about the world. The first occurred when I picked up Nick Bostr

Alright thank you that's enough.

[–] elmtonic@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago

The first occurred when I picked up Nick Bostrom’s book “superintelligence” and realized that AI would utterly transform the world.

"The first occurred when I picked up AI propaganda and realized the propaganda was true"

[–] swlabr@awful.systems 20 points 11 months ago

Hmm, how significant are we talking

predicted IQ of about 900

lol

[–] AcausalRobotGod@awful.systems 19 points 11 months ago (1 children)

LOL -- looking at the comments: "can somebody open a manifold market so I can get a sense of the probabilities?"

[–] GorillasAreForEating@awful.systems 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)

And yet the market is said to be "erring" and to have "irrationality" when it disagrees with rationalist ideas. Funny how that works.

[–] self@awful.systems 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It seems pretty obvious to me, and probably to many other people in the rationalist community, that if AGI goes well, every business that does not control AI or play a role in its production will become virtually worthless. Companies that have no hope of this are obviously overvalued, and those that might are probably undervalued (at least as a group).

asking the important questions: if my god materializes upon the earth, how can I use that to make a profit?

[–] locallynonlinear@awful.systems 12 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Question: if the only thing that matter is using AGI, what powers the AGI? Does the AGI produce net positive energy to power the continued expansion of AGI? Does AGI break the law of conservation because... if it didn't, it wouldn't be AGI?

[–] self@awful.systems 9 points 11 months ago

n-nuh uh, my super strong AI god will invent cold fusion and nanotechnology and then it won’t need any resources at all, my m-m-mathematical calculations prove it!

ok but how will the AI exist and exponentially multiply in a world where those things don’t already exist?

y-you can’t say that to me! I’m telling poppy yud and he’s gonna bomb all your data centers!

[–] GorillasAreForEating@awful.systems 18 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

the cell’s ribosomes will transcribe mRNA into a protein. It’s a little bit like an executable file for biology.

Also, because mRNA basically has root level access to your cells, your body doesn’t just shuttle it around and deliver it like the postal service. That would be a major security hazard.

I am not saying plieotropy doesn't exist. I'm saying it's not as big of a deal as most people in the field assume it is.

Genes determine a brain's architectural prior just as a small amount of python code determines an ANN's architectural prior, but the capabilities come only from scaling with compute and data (quantity and quality).

When you're entirely shameless about your Engineer's Disease

[–] FermiEstimate@lemmy.world 18 points 11 months ago (2 children)

This is quite a grandiose plan for someone writing a LessWrong blog post. And there’s a decent chance it won’t work out for either technical reasons or because I can't find the resources and talent to help me solve all the technical challenges.

The phrase "technical reasons" is doing an absolutely majestic amount of work in this sentence.

[–] dgerard@awful.systems 13 points 11 months ago (1 children)

don't forget the bit where anyone who thinks this idea leads to racist stupidity just hates science

[–] GorillasAreForEating@awful.systems 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Looking forward to LW articles with titles like "Ashkenazification via engineered viruses as a solution for African poverty: here's why it might work"

[–] bitofhope@awful.systems 9 points 11 months ago

LWers love Ashkenazi so much they'll happily have some even without the Ashke.

[–] locallynonlinear@awful.systems 8 points 11 months ago

If only he were neither constrained by technical hurdles or resources, dang.

[–] elmtonic@lemmy.world 17 points 11 months ago (3 children)

From the comments:

Effects of genes are complex. Knowing a gene is involved in intelligence doesn't tell us what it does and what other effects it has. I wouldn't accept any edits to my genome without the consequences being very well understood (or in a last-ditch effort to save my life). ... Source: research career as a computational cognitive neuroscientist.

OP:

You don't need to understand the causal mechanism of genes. Evolution has no clue what effects a gene is going to have, yet it can still optimize reproductive fitness. The entire field of machine learning works on black box optimization.

Very casually putting evolution in the same category as modifying my own genes one at a time until I become Jimmy Neutron.

Such a weird, myopic way of looking at everything. OP didn't appear to consider the downsides brought up by the commenter at all, and just plowed straight on through to "evolution did without understanding so we can too."

[–] NAXLAB@lemmy.world 13 points 11 months ago (1 children)

For real. Totally ignoring that evolution doesn't work on individuals, only species over MILLIONS OF YEARS, and ALSO WE STILL HAVE ALZHEIMERS, CANCER, AND HARLEQUIN ICHTHYOSIS

[–] knightly@pawb.social 9 points 11 months ago

Not to mention all the people that died of maladaptive mutations along the way.

[–] mutual_ayyde@mastodon.social 10 points 11 months ago

@elmtonic @dgerard "there is no difference between simulating an optimization process and actually carrying it out in the real world" is some top-tier rat shit, completely amazing

[–] Amoeba_Girl@awful.systems 5 points 11 months ago

lol another rationalist personificating evolution, shocking

[–] shinigami3@awful.systems 13 points 11 months ago

starts reading

looks at the scrollbar size

nope

[–] skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 11 months ago

If not for that pesky FDA, rats would develop the most bizzare case of liver failure that medicine has ever seen and took over the world with their superior intellect, any day now, you'll see

[–] Soyweiser@awful.systems 9 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

LLM's are great you doubters, look this guy even used it to get unshadowbanned on twitter.

Re the subject at hand 250+ upvotes oof. And once I again I feel the desire to write a 'gene editing to improve intelligence is immoral because of the higher depression risk that correlates with higher intelligence. But that would backfire very quickly (esp if we hook into other reasons why very smart people with no economic resources might even be extra depressed and poof we are back at eugenics and keeping the ~~Morlocks~~ poor away from intelligence improvements).

Vague association with eugenics make some academics shy away

This guys profile:

currently doing independent research on gene therapy with an emphasis on intelligence enhancement.

Gosh. (I honestly had not noticed these 2 quotes before I mentioned my trollpost + risk).

[–] skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

that's just brave new world with extra steps

[–] Soyweiser@awful.systems 6 points 11 months ago

I have thought that for the distopia a lot of the right fears brave new world fits a lot better than 1984. But that is unrelated to this.

[–] bitofhope@awful.systems 9 points 11 months ago

Credit where it's due, I appreciate them leading with a TL;DR link to a summary. Unfortunately the summary was also too long and I didn't read it. I'm happy for you though. Or sorry it happened.

[–] carlitoscohones@awful.systems 8 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I clicked the original LW link (not the archive link) and got a malware warning.

[–] dgerard@awful.systems 12 points 11 months ago (2 children)

it was warning you the page contained lesswrong rationalism

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MayonnaiseArch@beehaw.org 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Well he really could use a boost lol

[–] dgerard@awful.systems 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

he's even better in the comments, absolutely unhinged

[–] AcausalRobotGod@awful.systems 6 points 11 months ago

Maybe he'll get to the point where he thinks you could do it by changing mouth bacteria to CRISPR your shit. Cure gum disease at the same time!

[–] pikesley@mastodon.me.uk 5 points 11 months ago

@dgerard god almighty there's *so much of it*

load more comments
view more: next ›