You: We're building a bridge! It's going to be great! We've been thinking about it a bunch, and we're even starting work on it. We've got lots of great people. Let me tell you about why it's going to be great and very aesthetic. Me: Nice! Can you tell me a bit about the loads you're planning for the bridge to carry, and how they'll be supported? You: We'll work it out. We'll have great people. Great people are strong and make bridges that are strong and can carry mighty weights. Me: I'm asking about the bridge itself, not the people. How much weight will the bridge carry, and what materials will you use, and how will the loads be distributed to the pylons, and where will the pylons be embedded? If you don't think about these things and try to build a bridge anyway, it will just collapse. You: I don't get what you mean, you're being vague. Can you show a specific way that our bridge will collapse? Me: I can give an example sce...

How can we make many humans who are very good at solving difficult problems?

(Unresearched uncareful speculation.) TL;DR: Maybe eating food that's made of a bunch of different ingredients is bad because it prevents your gutbrain and headbrain from learning which foods correspond to which nutrients. Without knowing that, the brains can't accurately say when to eat what. My supporting data: It stands to reason. When I haven't eaten enough protein, I feel something's off and I'm compelled to eat more food; but I don't automatically specifically eat protein. Sometimes when I've exercised a lot, and have been drinking water, I still feel off. Then electrolytes tastes actively good, and I feel better after drinking them (and they stop tasting so good, or even taste a little bad). I had to learn this, I didn't automatically know it. One time I got sick and vomited after having eaten sweet potato fries with dijon mustard. A decade later, I still maybe wouldn't want to eat sweet potato fries, and would probably avoid the combo....

What is breaking? When something breaks, how does it break——how does it suddenly pass away? If it could have not broken, why did it break instead of not breaking? What drives the breaking forward?

[This post is labeled בבל, meaning it's especially experimental. See: בבל disclaimer ] If someone or something is eating you, this is a problem. It may seem strange to think that this even needs to be said. Surely. Surely, everyone wishes to not be eaten? And so would already agree that if, contrary to that wish, ze is being eaten, this is a problem? But yes, it needs to be said: How many have told themselves: "The one dining on me is misguided, truly, yes, but ze is good of heart. Ze expects to dine on me, and I wouldn't want to disappoint. I can bear this; my flesh regenerates, incompletely maybe, but still, I can bear it. In the future, I'll avoid getting into such a situation, but with zer in particular I'm already here." How many have advised their friend: "Those dining on you are despicable, yes, but there is nothing you can do, for now. If you dismount the dining table, they will hunt you! It would be better to bide your time and survive, for...

I gave a talk on 20 Feb 2024 in the PIBBSS speaker series . It's a talk version of " A hermeneutic net for agency ". Here's the talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ZaxlegV90w Here's the discussion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vznEzOCAmho Abstract: We are fundamentally confused about minds, and about what about a mind determines what about the world . Our concepts don't automatically support the inferences and design choices we would like to make using those concepts , and there are strong forces that will break weak supports . Drive-by attempts to rework one or a few concepts in isolation don't work . Minds are too big and structurally entangled within themselves to centrally unravel with a reductionist piecemeal method . The relevance of the most relevant mental elements is essentially provisional and requires the full context of a mind to be understood . The only source of useable data about minds and their intentions is our own minds . W...

Exploring the ruins of an alien civilization, you find what appears to be a working computer——it's made of plastic and metal, wires connect it to various devices, and you see arrays of capacitors that maintain charged or uncharged states and that sometimes rapidly toggle in response to voltages from connected wires. You can tell that the presumptive RAM is activating in complex but structured patterns, but you don't know their meanings. What strategies can you use to come to understand what the underlying order is, what algorithm the computer is running, that explains the pattern of RAM activations?

[This post is labeled בבל, meaning it's especially experimental. See: בבל disclaimer ] If one were to complain, one would hear, whether from the outside or from the inside, something like this:

[Caveat lector: I know roughly nothing about policy!] Suppose that there were political support to really halt research that might lead to an unstoppable, unsteerable transfer of control over the lightcone from humans to AGIs. What government policy could exert that political value?