I think this is a really interesting, well-written, topical piece of creative writing, anyone with a free hour or so should give it a read!
It reminded me of Pluribus and Armored Core VI, fascinatingly enough as they both feature (spoiler!) AIs/entities that appear innocuous but may have more sinister motives (in Armored Core it's a more foregone conclusion).
I don't think it's doomerism but rather a creative extrapolation of current worries about AI labs allowing agents to break containment because of their poor sandboxing.
What's also interesting (although more of a meta-comment) is the dichotomy between how users on Lesswrong and here have completely different options on it. In either case, it's nice and was worth my time, even though I don't have anything more substantiative to say.
Lots of negative comments here, which is surprising as I'm enjoying reading it so far. There's a line which made me smile when August says "It's not a flaw — it's an understandable gap."
I absolutely hate this AI turn of phrase that I'm starting to see everywhere. Even one of our MPs in the UK wrote a Facebook post recently and it was full of lines like this. I asked him if he'd used AI to write his post but he didn't reply. I'm 99% sure he did and I hate it.
It's not AI fanfic. It seems well written, and can be considered a novella. Flies close to what I have read in the past. I'll give it proper time to read it.
You apparently didn't watch Pluribus or read this. Pluribus is about the experience of essentially the last autonomous person on Earth. This is about the experience of the Singularity and the questions it raises.
Yes
It reminded me of Pluribus and Armored Core VI, fascinatingly enough as they both feature (spoiler!) AIs/entities that appear innocuous but may have more sinister motives (in Armored Core it's a more foregone conclusion).
I don't think it's doomerism but rather a creative extrapolation of current worries about AI labs allowing agents to break containment because of their poor sandboxing.
What's also interesting (although more of a meta-comment) is the dichotomy between how users on Lesswrong and here have completely different options on it. In either case, it's nice and was worth my time, even though I don't have anything more substantiative to say.
Read by Leonard Nimoy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmcURKn2sf8
I absolutely hate this AI turn of phrase that I'm starting to see everywhere. Even one of our MPs in the UK wrote a Facebook post recently and it was full of lines like this. I asked him if he'd used AI to write his post but he didn't reply. I'm 99% sure he did and I hate it.
That's at least how it begins.
I'll maybe read some more of it in the evening...
This does not help the cult accusations.