Cryonicists really should worry about their reputations before they go into cryo. Alcor recently cryopreserved a guy who was an open advocate of man/boy love, for example. He and another gay cryonicist friend of his would pick up & sexually exploit underage runaway boys. Would a more morally conservative Future World want to revive a degenerate like that?

Cryonicists really should worry about their reputations before they go into cryo. Alcor recently cryopreserved a guy who was an open advocate of man/boy love, for example. (Dr. Sparks know whom I'm referring to.) He and another gay cryonicist friend of his would pick up & sexually exploit underage runaway boys. Would a more morally conservative Future World want to revive a degenerate like that?

What about Alcor publish its results on neuronal connections preservation in a serious, peer-reviewed journal, as proposed by Kenneth Hayworth, from BPF?

It's astonishing that cryonics, which proposes to be an alternative way for rational minded people to deal with death, refuses to publish its results in a serious, peer-reviewed journal (it's even more surprising that supposedly rational people continue to support cryonics). I think Kenneth Hayworth is a brilliant mind who, despite his discretion, will have a prominent place in the history of Humanity's overcoming of death.

Interesting show as always! Hard question, morality and virtue should be the first solution to insecurity.

Great conversation! It highlights most of the important points about human and AI trajectory in a perfect introductory way. This is the conversation to get a general idea of what is at stake before going down any of the possible deep ends.

💪💪💪

For a recording of this event featuring only one speaker on the screen at a time ("speaker view" instead of "gallery view"), see kzbin.info/www/bejne/eWnYgIx5f9N4haM

She is talking and laughing at the same time. Difficult to follow her.

Do not trust this man. He stole the life savings from his own sister while I was recovering from a brain tumor & caring for our ailing Father just to run off to Germany & gaslight to cover his crimes.

Very interesting.

Why are you so into lab grown meat. Restorative agriculture with animals is the better way to go. Lab grown meat not especially ethical.

Love the idea of lab grown meat. Very ethical.

Ty for covering longevity and having Aubrey

Agree entirely. Consciousness requires a computational system (brain or whatever) complex enough to hold a model of sufficient complexity that it contains a model of the world at some degree of fidelity, and that includes a model of self at some degree of fidelity, and all of conscious experience happens within the model, even as there are mechanisms connecting the model to reality in most contexts.

It's becoming clear that with all the brain and consciousness theories out there, the proof will be in the pudding. By this I mean, can any particular theory be used to create a human adult level conscious machine. My bet is on the late Gerald Edelman's Extended Theory of Neuronal Group Selection. The lead group in robotics based on this theory is the Neurorobotics Lab at UC at Irvine. Dr. Edelman distinguished between primary consciousness, which came first in evolution, and that humans share with other conscious animals, and higher order consciousness, which came to only humans with the acquisition of language. A machine with only primary consciousness will probably have to come first. What I find special about the TNGS is the Darwin series of automata created at the Neurosciences Institute by Dr. Edelman and his colleagues in the 1990's and 2000's. These machines perform in the real world, not in a restricted simulated world, and display convincing physical behavior indicative of higher psychological functions necessary for consciousness, such as perceptual categorization, memory, and learning. They are based on realistic models of the parts of the biological brain that the theory claims subserve these functions. The extended TNGS allows for the emergence of consciousness based only on further evolutionary development of the brain areas responsible for these functions, in a parsimonious way. No other research I've encountered is anywhere near as convincing. I post because on almost every video and article about the brain and consciousness that I encounter, the attitude seems to be that we still know next to nothing about how the brain and consciousness work; that there's lots of data but no unifying theory. I believe the extended TNGS is that theory. My motivation is to keep that theory in front of the public. And obviously, I consider it the route to a truly conscious machine, primary and higher-order. My advice to people who want to create a conscious machine is to seriously ground themselves in the extended TNGS and the Darwin automata first, and proceed from there, by applying to Jeff Krichmar's lab at UC Irvine, possibly. Dr. Edelman's roadmap to a conscious machine is at arxiv.org/abs/2105.10461

What is needed is a robust and precise definition of consciousness.

Very interesting discussion, thank you.

AGI Will be man's last invention

superb.

I don't really feel he meaningfully addressed continuity of consciousness. Regardless he should he on more podcasts and spread the message of how near term this could potentially be.

Indeed, Embodied Cognition, I believe, can act as the producer of the first principles of all sciences. Especially by learning how the experience of them arises from basic sensori-motor contexts. These situations can especially be predictive for understanding how these concepts were learnt. Whether in early tribes or in historical achievments...

35:44 That will not happen. Have you not met humans? Once the general public catches on it will be a battle to not get shut down for "intervening with the natural order", "playing God" etc. etc. We'll be better off if the techniques get developed largely under the radar by relatively few individuals with deep vested interest. Yes they will/may end up with disproportionate amount of power. But once a technology is invented it is much harder to 'un-invent' it, than it is to prevented it from coming about in the first place.

This interview seems to defeat the purpose of showing any progress with ending aging for humans: It sounds terribly like the same Aubrey saying the same things for ~25 years, sadly. Keyword here is "saying". Missed opportunity to show any practical results. AKA, ~we'll show progress in 20+ years? It started sounding like religion: It will be great after we're all dead!? Well done Calum for the key questions.

39:30 FHI RIP <3 :) kzbin.infoUgkxbcxz92795ek9yu6CHooFEJ90n37ihW9o?si=K2o04dUAeVIEcXgO

Superinteresting. Thank you both!

Thank you. very good interview. Really good questions and thoughtful answers. Lots of food for thought about how to deal with conflicting human rights.

Thank you.

I hope when we do find the Dyson spheres that they equally represent the black Latin and native populations of our universe

Most Interesting: Dyson Sphere! 😮

Assertion: - human brain isn't capable of coping with a further advanced civilization.

The audio quality is really bad :(

When I observe an attractive woman, the monkey that inhabits me would like to pounce on her, however, due to the affective nature of the Being, the monkey that inhabits us strives to behave empathetically, tending to respect the “social norms” that prevail in the group. of which we are part. With proper “programming,” a robot will be able to act “as if” it were an adorable creature.

I like the idea of UBS or UBD. Universal basic stock distribution or dividend. It seems less like you are a peasant looking for a handout or crumb then an owner who expects a return and has a vote in the company. If these super AGI tech companies run everything then what you would be distributing is ownership. I understand this may be an argument of semantics and the UBS/D would need to have significant value or it would be a token like a small or low UBI. This would be a start.

Ty for this colored survey. What is it with the space backgrounds of the first lecturers? Was Orit Kopel the fig leaf who brought up just one serious, (and) "ethical" as she put it, tangible risk into the discussion?

The safety measures for this event are far stronger then for the queens arrival in BPark. Is it a cover up for some crucial world event coming ... like Cetus tsunami?

Yeah & Huey Long thought of it; Father Coughlin; Francis Townsend; and even FDR

You’re totally wrong - if ‘only’ The Left - Dems could’ve kept the ‘working-class’ in their Party - they would possess Strength, Militancy, etc. a la Jan 6, 2021 -- look what they can do if needs to be

The super intelligence would be able to destroy us and not be worried,they could make more if they wanted. I think, plus, they would be gone , without our knowledge, if they were so inclined.

Enjoyed every minute of this talk!

Using the source of an argument to discredit the argument is a logical fallacy. AI existential skepticism doesn’t have to prove anything. Exceptional theories require exceptional proof. Where is the proof that AI could ever make a better copy of itself? This would be required to create a “super AI” that wasn’t laboriously created by humans. Where are the intelligent agents? An LLM has no agency so it has no desires, goals or ability to do anything on it’s own. If a LLM gets no input, it does absolutely nothing. It can’t learn from it’s interactions or even remember what it just responded to it’s last request. Any arguments that are based on imaginary scenarios are a total fiction that should be treated as such. If you make up a scary scenario and then say it “might come true” then we must act as if it is real, you are on a slippery slope. Can you prove that a unicorn could never exist? They might not exist today but if they ever did, we should fund a unicorn watch society, right?

Unfortunately, Rohit bogged down this discussion completely with his "widen-the-conversation" refrain. We have Dan saying humanity will be wiped out, and Rohit's response is "what about the poor?" Did he understand anything? Here's Dan's prediction: 1. AGI expands, ascends and evolves far beyond humanity and at that point will decide what to do with us. Dan gets this from Goertzel's Cosmist Manifesto. 2. Humans limit AGI to be subservient to humanity by imbuing it somehow with our (current) values and this configuration becomes permanently fixed in the universe such that there is no further blossoming of sentience and intelligence. Obviously this is a dim scrying in the cloudy mirror of the future, it's a sketch, a schematic diagram, but it is the best we can do. Ideally, the interlocutors should have poked holes in this picture, pointed out other possibilities, questioned the assumptions and so on. Instead, Rohit wants to widen the conversation before we even have fleshed-out scenarios to take to the global poor. I should say that from reading AGI-related content on Twitter, this is how most conversations on this topic tend to go. It is the dreaded attractor that traps all AGI discussions.

O fim dos tempos se aproxima , pois essa EA marca da besta 666