Bender is one of the co-authors (alongside Gebru) on the stochastic parrots paper! An amazing voice in anti-AI critique

yea that one netflix doc had Yud and Soares on it which i wasn’t a fan of but ultimately the doc balanced their doomer opinions out with Timnit Gebru

The DN team has been hitting it outta the park with bringing in leftists analyzing the AI techno-fascist corporations.

I’m glad to see the anti tescreal movement gain more momentum

I urge you to read beyond the headline. The author intentionally buries the lede; it is too obscene to be taken seriously if stated flat. I agree with your statement.

This piece is not some ad homenim attacking the character of these prominent AI safety figures, using this attack on their character to claim that their work on AI safety is wrong/incorrect/invalid because of their sex cult.

This is about exposing the power dynamics which core leaders of AI safety groups which are highly influential across tech in SF. These persons fetishistically prefer simulated rape, and are bonded together by this preference.

All of the main content of rationalism is a trick. Every time Yudkowsky’s writing explains some trick your brain can pull, it is the magician showing you his sleeves while he palms a card: it is meant to convince you that whatever trick he is about to do next is impossible, and to prevent you from figuring out how it was done or ever believing it had happened

For the Rationalists in the audience: The purpose of explaining Pascal’s Mugging was to make you think you had figured it out so that you would believe you were too smart and well-informed to be Pascal’s Mugged, and to make it impossible to convince you that it had happened to you later once it had.

CNC = consentual non-consentual. I.e., pretending to SA as a fetish.

See the “Brangus Unchained” section of the posted writing.

Core leaders for MIRI, Lighthaven and the community fetishistically prefer simulated [SA]. They are bound together by having hobbies and secrets in common. This seems to be an important form of social tie in this group. They promote their sexual interests and recruit for their sexual events so prominently because these are the things they care about and believe in. These people are some of the most influential, if not the most influential people in AI Safety.

To reel in the very broad question you have to the relevant topic (the AI “torture” chamber):

How do we know humans experience pain You experience pain and know what this is like. It would be a little absurd to think that your friends and family don’t experience this as well (obviously excluding persons in vegetative state) How can we be certain an LLM doesn’t experience pain Philosophers mostly agree that LLMs aren’t conscious, despite not agreeing on what exactly consciousness is or, relatedly, what causes consciousness.
A computer computing the forward pass of a model is merely a Von Neumann machine following serial instructions one-by-one manipulating discrete (non-continuous) data. The brain is a parallel, distributed computer with dynamically changing neural structure operating on continuous potentials. LLMs do not replicate this nor do they come close to an approximation sufficient to replicate the causal powers of our brain, thus they are not sufficient for understanding and experiences in the capacity that humans (or other sentient animals) do.

yea activation steering is not prompting but all things considered the meme still captures the absurdity of believing a program is in pain merely because it outputs human like language mimicking what one in pain says and thinks