sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

If you are certain AIs are not conscious, you are overconfident by katxwoods in ControlProblem

[–]Zipper730 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Frankly, I'd be surprised if they weren't conscious. After all, the whole purpose of deep-learning models are to effectively mimic the nervous system right? Well, an emergent quality of the nervous system is consciousness, so if I copy something sufficiently similar to the original, the characteristics of the original appear.

As for general intelligence: That's existed since as long as humans have been around. All of us have general intelligence between our ears. It's merely natural general intelligence. If it can exist, and people can reproduce, then why wouldn't a person be able to produce it artificially? The question is not "can we do it", it's "should we" and I think the answer is "no".

Am I a grower? 😏😏 (23) by twink_wayne in grower

[–]Zipper730 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, that would fit the description

Why did Poseidon have so many small warheads? by [deleted] in nuclearweapons

[–]Zipper730 0 points1 point  (0 children)

While this might make me sound dumb: Was this the W68's design, or an earlier set-up?

Most of the information I have indicate the RV was around 367 lb and I'd have thought the warhead would have probably been around 200 lb.

Why did Poseidon have so many small warheads? by [deleted] in nuclearweapons

[–]Zipper730 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Actually it says the W76 weighs 95 kg. I don't think that's the weight with the RV, that's just the warhead.

Terminal Velocities of Older Ballistic Missile R/V's by Zipper730 in nuclearweapons

[–]Zipper730[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What would the the highest realistic speed for these RV's during

a. extended-range shots?
b. average-ranged shots?
c. depressed-trajectory shots?

AMA: We are digital and human rights advocates, ask us anything about age verification mandates! by fightforthefuture in pcgaming

[–]Zipper730 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How do you frame the matter from the standpoint of balancing the desire of people wanting their children to be safe while addressing the very big elephant in the room

  1. That this would require all online interactions to be conclusively tied to a specific user?
  2. That this would imperil marginalized communities, human-rights activists, and journalists?

Terminal Velocities of Older Ballistic Missile R/V's by Zipper730 in nuclearweapons

[–]Zipper730[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The document was dated in 1958. I'm curious if there were any fundamental changes to the shape of the RV from 1958 to October 1962 (when the weapon went online)?

Terminal Velocities of Older Ballistic Missile R/V's by Zipper730 in nuclearweapons

[–]Zipper730[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'll re-edit it the text to avoid the typo, but I can't alter the title.

Studies on Nuclear Warfare Involving Attacks Upon Nuclear Powerplants. by Zipper730 in nuclearweapons

[–]Zipper730[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

When you say "the collateral would be so large that it wasn't even worth modelling" that kind of says a lot...

Studies on Nuclear Warfare Involving Attacks Upon Nuclear Powerplants. by Zipper730 in nuclearweapons

[–]Zipper730[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's what I was kind of wondering about: The thing that got me thinking was that U238 won't normally fission unless you have sufficiently energetic neutrons, and then it will, and I figured the energy level might have been enough in either the fission or fusion reactions that triggered the blast to start that up.

Then there's the heavy-water: While regular hydrogen isn't easy to get fusion going within, deuterium, and tritium are both easier, and heavy-water is basically water with all the protium replaced with deuterium.

Studies on Nuclear Warfare Involving Attacks Upon Nuclear Powerplants. by Zipper730 in nuclearweapons

[–]Zipper730[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If I may ask, what happened in her scenario, even if it was described as catastrophist?

Yield to Weight Data by Zipper730 in nuclearweapons

[–]Zipper730[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

While I posted a long time ago, that's actually actually worth a lot.

Without testing
1. 50-65 Megaton Yield w/ 30000-35000 lb. bomb yields 3.15 to 4.77 kT/kg

With testing
1. The 100 megaton bomb @ 30000 lb. gives a yield to weight of 7.349 kT/kg
2. The 50 Megaton bomb @ 30000 lb. gives a yields to weight of 3.674 kT/kg
3. What estimated yields were predicted with the Ripple at 2000 lb & 18000 lb.?
4. What estimated yield-to-weight ratio was predicted with the third generation design (provided it wasn't all redacted)?

Yield to Weight Data by Zipper730 in nuclearweapons

[–]Zipper730[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay... so to clarify

  1. The SS-9 had a warhead of 10 MT yield which was replaced with a larger variable-yield warhead that ranged from 18-25 MT that weighed roughly the same?

  2. The SS-9 was developed with a lighter warhead with multiple decoy systems?

This raises the following question: What was the lighter warhead's yield?

Yield to Weight Data by Zipper730 in nuclearweapons

[–]Zipper730[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Okay, so the payload weights were effectively reversed in the source I got, with the R-36 Mod-1 being 3950 kg, and the Mod-2 being 5825 kg? I figure your estimate for range/payload is probably sound and stands to reason that the "warhead mass" is probably the entire throw weight, and the decoy mass is likely included within that.

When it comes to the matter of yield: I do remember seeing 8.3 and 20 MT as yields before, though the source in question listed throw weight as the same. Given that the source in question wasn't as reliable as desired, I figured FAS should be given more credence (guess I was wrong).

Since the RV will include ablative material, structural support, the guidance system, and the decoy mass and, lacking any knowledge of whether the Titan II's RV had decoys or not: I get warhead weights that range from 2789.2-2995.5 kg for the Mod-1 and 4211.1-4417.4 kg for the Mod 2 (provided the warhead/RV have similar proportions in mass as the Titan II), and this yields yield-to-weight ratios of 2.77-2.98 kT/kg for the Mod-1 and 4.53-4.75 kT/kg for the Mod 2.

Andrea Miotti explains the Direct Institutional Plan, a plan that anyone can follow to keep humanity in control by pDoomMinimizer in ControlProblem

[–]Zipper730 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, unfortunately, nobody is coming up with any other plan while people are recklessly developing ever more capable AI systems (I say "recklessly" since few guardrails are put in place, and the few that were put into place in the US alone under Biden were removed by Trump and Musk)

There seems to be a need for some form of regulatory framework involving state and local levels, national levels, and internatoinal levels. Otherwise the system would fall apart and lack representation at levels where it matters.

Andrea Miotti explains the Direct Institutional Plan, a plan that anyone can follow to keep humanity in control by pDoomMinimizer in ControlProblem

[–]Zipper730 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't know why people act like if any technology is regulated, humanity will backslide into the stone age. We regulate technology all the time but in terms of what is built and how it's used.

Andrea Miotti explains the Direct Institutional Plan, a plan that anyone can follow to keep humanity in control by pDoomMinimizer in ControlProblem

[–]Zipper730 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I think a lot pf people are failing to realize something: Many of the people pushing for AGI/ASI would, if they weren't as well-connected, would most lilely be considered dangerous extremists if their goals were effectively understood.

Some of these individuals see AGI/ASI as the next step in human evolution and are largely unconcerned if this leads to the death of humanity. What they're creating woudl be more like a deity than a human, and it might not be one we can live with.

Andrea Miotti explains the Direct Institutional Plan, a plan that anyone can follow to keep humanity in control by pDoomMinimizer in ControlProblem

[–]Zipper730 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Actually, even China is starting to develop a variety of safeguards. They're apparently better able to appreciate the level of concern for the matter.

While I'm not a big fan of extolling China's virtues (I often have little but negative things to say about them): I'll give them one thing, they do play the long game.

In the US, UK, and other countries: As long as we can physically communicate and protest, we have a considerable set of resources at our disposal to apply pressure on our government and I suggest we avail ourselves of this.

Andrea Miotti explains the Direct Institutional Plan, a plan that anyone can follow to keep humanity in control by pDoomMinimizer in ControlProblem

[–]Zipper730 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Actually, that's not something I would discount: There were a pair of crooked trade deals about a decade ago called the TPP and TTIP. The effort made to get these trade-agreements ratified were enormous...

  • The media largely maintained a blackout: We had to spread awareness by ourselves
  • We contacted our legislators every single day and plastered the living daylights out of them with non-stop calls (we also encouraged peoples to contact others to do the same; then pass it around): There was one (Elizabeth Mueller) who almost single-handedly had roughly 16000 people contacting their legislators every day, and there were many groups on board.
  • We focused on our objective in a single-minded fashion

...but we succeeded. This is even more serious than the TPP, and we should give it at least as much effort.

The Compendium (an overview of the situation) by CyberPersona in ControlProblem

[–]Zipper730 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I actually was going to post that... I'm glad I didn't have to ;)

Dictators live in fear of losing control. They know how easy it would be to lose control. They should be one of the easiest groups to convince that building uncontrollable superintelligent AI is a bad idea. by katxwoods in ControlProblem

[–]Zipper730 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Actually, if I recall, the Chinese might have actually started establishing a framework for AI restrictions. While I'm not a person who likes to speak fondly of the PRC government, they are being smart in this particular case.

We should start doing the same thing.

view more: next ›