Originally published May 3, 2023.

Robin Hanson is an associate professor of economics at George Mason University and a research associate at the Future of ...

Originally published May 9, 2023.

Originally published May 11, 2023. Join Reason’s Zach Weissmueller for a discussion of an open letter calling for an immediate pause to artificial intelligence research on large language models like GPT-4 with economist Robin Hanson and tech investor Jaan Tallin, who was part of the software team responsible for creating Skype and a co-founder of the Future of Life Institute that organized and published the open letter.  “We call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4,” reads an open letter organized by the Future of Life Institute and endorsed by over 27,000 signatories, including Elon Musk and Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak.  Since the publication of the letter on March 22, the White House has summoned the leaders of the nation’s top artificial intelligence companies for a discussion about regulation. Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer (D–N.Y.) is “taking early steps toward legislation to regulate artificial intelligence technology,” according to reporting from Axios. Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, the company responsible for ChatGPT, has said that optimizing artificial intelligence for the good of society “requires partnership with government and regulation.” But economist Robin Hanson worries that too much of today’s fear of artificial intelligence is a more generalized “future fear” that will imperil technological progress likely to benefit humanity. “Most people have always feared change. And if they had really understood what changes were coming, most probably would have voted against most changes we’ve seen,” Hanson wrote in a recent post on the topic. “For example, fifty years ago the public thought they saw a nuclear energy future with unusual vividness, and basically voted no.”

Originally published May 9, 2023.

Originally published May 9, 2023.

Robin Hanson joins the podcast to talk about the AI debate. He explains his reasons for being skeptical about “foom,” or the idea that there will emerge a sudden superintelligence that will be able to improve itself quickly and potentially destroy humanity in the service of its goals. Among his arguments are: * We should start with a very low prior about something like this happening, given the history of the world. We already have “superintelligences” in the form of firms, for example, and they only improve slowly and incrementally * There are different levels of abstraction with regards to intelligence and knowledge. A machine that can reason very fast may not have the specific knowledge necessary to know how to do important things. * We may be erring in thinking of intelligence as a general quality, rather than as more domain-specific. Hanania presents various arguments made by AI doomers, and Hanson responds to each in kind, eventually giving a less than 1% chance that something like the scenario imagined by Eliezer Yudkowsky and others will come to pass. He also discusses why he thinks it is a waste of time to worry about the control problem before we know what any supposed superintelligence will even look like. The conversation includes a discussion about why so many smart people seem drawn to AI doomerism, and why you shouldn’t worry all that much about the principal-agent problem in this area. Listen in podcast form or watch on YouTube . You can also read a transcript of the conversation here. Links: * The Hanson-Yudkowsky AI-Foom Debate * Previous Hanson appearance on CSPI podcast, audio and transcript * Eric Drexler, Engines of Creation * Eric Drexler, Nanosystems * Robin Hanson, “Explain the Sacred” * Robin Hanson, “We See the Sacred from Afar, to See It the Same.” * Articles by Robin on AI alignment: * “Prefer Law to Values” (October 10, 2009) * “The Betterness Explosion” (June 21, 2011) * “Foom Debate, Again” (February 8, 2013) * “How Lumpy AI Services?” (February 14, 2019) * “Agency Failure AI Apocalypse?” (April 10, 2019) * “Foom Update” (May 6, 2022) * “Why Not Wait?” (June 30, 2022) Get full access to Center for the Study of Partisanship and Ideology at www.cspicenter.com/subscribe

Originally published May 9, 2023.

In this highly anticipated sequel to our 1st AI conversation with Eliezer Yudkowsky, we bring you a thought-provoking discussion with Robin Hanson, a professor of economics at George Mason University and a research associate at the Future of Humanity Institute of Oxford University.  Eliezer painted a chilling and grim picture of a future where AI ultimately kills us all​. Robin is here to provide a different perspective. ------ DEBRIEF | Unpacking the episode:       ------ COLLECTIBLES | Collect this episode:    ------ NEW BANKLESS PRODUCT | Token Hub    ------ In this episode, we explore: - Why Robin believes Eliezer is wrong and that we’re not all going to die from an AI takeover. But will we potentially become their pets instead? - The possibility of a civil war between multiple AIs and why it’s more likely than being dominated by a single superintelligent AI. - Robin’s concerns about the regulation of AI and why he believes it’s a greater threat than AI itself. - A fascinating analogy: why Robin thinks alien civilizations might spread like cancer? - Finally, we dive into the world of crypto and explore Robin’s views on this rapidly evolving technology. Whether you’re an AI enthusiast, a crypto advocate, or just someone intrigued by the big-picture questions about humanity and its prospects, this episode is one you won’t want to miss. ------ BANKLESS SPONSOR TOOLS:  ️ ARBITRUM | SCALING ETHEREUM   KRAKEN | MOST-TRUSTED CRYPTO EXCHANGE   UNISWAP | ON-CHAIN MARKETPLACE   PHANTOM | FRIENDLY MULTICHAIN WALLET   METAMASK LEARN | HELPFUL WEB3 RESOURCE   ------ Topics Covered 0:00 Intro 8:42 How Robin is Weird 10:00 Are We All Going to Die? 13:50 Eliezer’s Assumption  25:00 Intelligence, Humans, & Evolution  27:31 Eliezer Counter Point  32:00 Acceleration of Change  33:18 Comparing & Contrasting Eliezer’s Argument 35:45 A New Life Form 44:24 AI Improving Itself 47:04 Self Interested Acting Agent  49:56 Human Displacement?  55:56 Many AIs  1:00:18 Humans vs. Robots  1:04:14 Pause or Continue AI Innovation? 1:10:52 Quiet Civilization  1:14:28 Grabby Aliens  1:19:55 Are Humans Grabby? 1:27:29 Grabby Aliens Explained  1:36:16 Cancer  1:40:00 Robin’s Thoughts on Crypto  1:42:20 Closing & Disclaimers  ------ Resources: Robin Hanson   Eliezer Yudkowsky on Bankless   What is the AI FOOM debate?   Age of Em book - Robin Hanson   Grabby Aliens   Kurzgesagt video   ----- Not financial or tax advice. This channel is strictly educational and is not investment advice or a solicitation to buy or sell any assets or to make any financial decisions. This video is not tax advice. Talk to your accountant. Do your own research. Disclosure. From time-to-time I may add links in this newsletter to products I use. I may receive commission if you make a purchase through one of these links. Additionally, the Bankless writers hold crypto assets. See our investment disclosures here:  

Originally published May 12, 2023.

View the transcript for this episode here: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Imagine two smart curious friendly and basically truth-seeking people, but from very different intellectual traditions. Traditions with different tools, priorities, and ground rules. What would they discuss? Would they talk past each other? Make any progress? Would anyone want to hear them? Economist Robin Hanson and philosopher Agnes Callard decided to find out. Visit the Minds Almost Meeting website here:  ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠

YouGov America released a survey of 20,810 American adults. … 46% say that they are “very concerned” or “somewhat concerned” about the possibility that AI will cause the end of the human race on Earth … There do not seem to be meaningful differences by region, gender, or political party. Younger people seem more concerned than older people.… Furthermore, 69% of Americans appear to support a six-month pause in “some kinds of AI development”. (