You’re bound to run into @wiglet1981.bsky.social no matter where you are!

But the Pittsburgh yinz is for everybody.

First time back in 15 years.

True belief only. Theaetetus got played.

I was recently asked what I thought about the rationalists. I immediately thought we were talking about Descartes and Leibniz.

Spotted at H&M. Take it however you want.

Do you still feel bad about yourself after getting a journal rejection?

My teachers in grad school left out that bit.

Sure, let me Dutch book myself.

Proceduralists concerned with fair representation should view belief aggregation/opinion pooling as a credal cake-cutting problem.

Random thought: alignment should entail coalitional envy-freeness. But envy-freeness is likely violated in many cases since states of alignment are often Pareto dominated by the status quo.

Maybe my most boomerish moment: back in my day, we were taught argument from analogy is bad mmmk.

Agency is all the rage at the tech companies, so that’s a strong angle. My preliminary thoughts are on how misalignment could be advanced by neglecting wellbeing in case it turns out to be realized by systems (whether genuine or simulated).

We should chat about it once I get some ideas going.

For sure! The algorithmic fairness stuff was some low hanging fruit since statistical fairness criteria and ensemble learning relate to my formal work. I'm starting to get into AI welfare, more long conceptual lines rather than formal, so that might be something if you have any interest there.

Hot,humid summer day in Hong Kong. But what a view.

Thanks!

I’ll be joining the University of Hong Kong 🇭🇰 this month to work broadly on AI Welfare. Big topic, but bigger life event.

In the case of fear, maybe there is an implicit conditional/positive correlation in the background, where the antecedent/conditioning variable is the reason, i.e., q -> p or pr(p | q) such that pr(p | q) > pr(p).

Nein

Lots of AI debates would disappear if we brought eliminative materialism back in style.

I asked my five-year-old nephew if he is a human. He says, “Of course, I am a HUMEAN!”

Controversial take: AI MADE METAPHYSICS GREAT AGAIN

And a lack of engagement.

Has the following claim been explicitly made by P(doom) > 0 folk:

P(doom | mistreatment) >= P(doom)

'mistreatment' refers to some form of mistreatment of developed AI systems. #AISafety #AIAlignment

Yep

Relaxed or uptight?

Editors could also make positive suggestions where appropriate for desk rejects. PPA recently desk rejected a paper of mine, but said “we think this looks like a very good paper” but a better fit for another journal like Synthese or Episteme. That was helpful and encouraging.

I always do that, especially if it’s clear that the reviewers skimmed the paper and complain about things that have been addressed.

Any time you go to Greggs, you’re automatically maximizing.