I don’t understand at all how this shows that “techie types lack empathy”…if the point of this video was to express that we must continue to be vigil in the face of accelerating tech, then the USAF succeeded.

So indeed, the best strategy according to him would be to strive for an environment that would at least put the odds in our favor to help ensure the AI fosters the values we want it too, like liberty, empathy tolerance, respect…..the same way a parent could try to raise their child in the best environment they can to at least try and steer the child away from the roads they don’t want it to go — their’s no guarentee, but it pays to try.

It’s not foolproof, but creating something vastly more powerful then us and then trying to constrain it may not give the best impression.

So the fact that the USAF is using such a viewpoint, indeed, feels like are taking his advice.

It’s funny, there are many utopians who envisage a new age of peace and oneness, but the USAF don’t seem to envisage themselves as absent from that picture. There’s a lack of communication there somewhere, I’m sure.

But that was only one of many mistakes.For example he could have taken the British army at Dunkirk, and his fat airforce leader should have stopped schwitching targets, finishing first the radars then the rest (or vice versa).The UK would probably have given in.

Another thing is he has been persuaded by a spy (!) not to ally with Spain.

Some years ago I played this “grande strategie” game called Hoi2 with a right wing friend of mine (my friends have very differing political opinions, since I mostly don’t care) against some guys he found on the internet (other right wingers, from their respective countries, always alluded me how they could cooperate without arguing,prbly for their “greater good”).

I was already familiar with this kind of games.Anyway, I named my marines militia and bombed his ships.He pulled them back and I landed with the “militia” (some players guard their coast with militia) in Cardiff.

Needless to say, by the time I attacked the soviet union (same year, 1940) the UK player had left, England, Scotland and Irland were my puppets and guarding their beaches against the remnants of the UK.
Their respective airforce helped send communism to hell^^

So, games are just models, abstractions, but I think you have very good thoughts about what to do with the vanquished, as long as public opinion in your country actually allows to do these things, and they don’t run counter to what you want to achieve (the Nazies wanted to Germanize the slavs in their annexed territories).

Btw: Even if Genghis was exceptionally agressive because of genetics, I have no doubt that does not mean we can”t be agressive without them.

Have a joyfull day^^

I have an important offer to make, my friend: Trusthworthy me changes your nature for you, so the state can’t do it anymore.

What do you think? I’ll even pay you 1 $ if you volunteer!

Btw: You seem to be arguing from a flawed premise:
One does not need to be abnormal to engage in conflict.Without the agression of our ancestors, we’d probably not be writing this.

Excellent quote. Who would have thought the Airforce would have described itself in the first 5 seconds of the video.

The truly compassionate have no power in this world and the truly pathological have all the power. Now given that, you decide, is the future a Utopia or Dystopia?

From our perspective, strong AI itself could be the malovent individual.

I think existential risk is highly underestimated in the minds of the common (wo)man, simply because we obviously have no precedent case in which it actually happened (to us).And no other species we know of came even close of possesing the requisite technology necessary to be threatened by.

Just one more way humans are biased: If it did not happen it can’t happen.