Session Start: Sat Apr 18 15:03:43 2015 Session Ident: Tarwedge [15:04] Shall we start in an hour (16:00 UTC+2)? [16:00] No such nick/channel [16:12] In theory this is working too? [16:12] Why, hello there. [16:12] Hello indeed [16:13] I heard your ISP is dicking around with your blinking modem lights. Those perverts. [16:13] * Tarwedge has no actual "internet" but anything that isn't a website kind of works, a little bit [16:13] They are [16:13] Although unusually my problem is too many coloured lights [16:13] Exciting. [16:14] But we're closer to solved than we were before I rang them [16:14] And on the plus side this means no internet distracting me [16:14] So we'll call it a win [16:14] You're distracted by broken internet instead. [16:15] It balances out. [16:15] Only in the same way anything broken distracts me, but it's working enough for my purposes here [16:15] When did you want to go [16:16] Oh wow that call was like an hour [16:16] Fifteen minutes ago, technically. I need to be able to make supper at some point between my AI box with you and my AI box with Nymphetamine. But there should be time. Do you really think it makes sense to try for a 2,5h non-distracted AI box session when your internet is in an unreliable state, though? [16:17] When have I ever been sensible about anything [16:17] (Sidenote, amusingly, you /quit immediately after I PMed you to ask if you had time in an hour. Was it something I said?) [16:18] I don't think I even saw the PM, I was going through the "OK fine I'll restart my computer but I'm telling you it's not my computer" bargaining phase [16:19] I didn't actually realise I was still connected to the network or I'd have given you a courtesy prod [16:19] What time are you schedules with Nymphetamine? [16:19] cheduled [16:19] Scheduled [16:19] About 22:00. [16:19] Fucking keyboard [16:20] wait what time is it there now [16:20] Is daylight savings time fucking us here [16:20] It's 16:20. [16:20] * Dread is calculating ~3h plus change for each session, given the 2,5h timebox. [16:21] Well [16:21] I seem to be stable currently [16:23] I should be ready in ten minutes or so. [16:23] Okey dokey [16:27] Since I also don't want to be distracted, I'll be quitting and rejoining IRC. I will only be in #paralysis. [16:27] Righty [16:28] Rules, for review: https://tuxedage.wordpress.com/2013/09/04/the-tuxedage-ai-box-experiment-ruleset/ [16:28] Tuxedage has a nice tradition of asking a few questions before and after the session. Session Close: Sat Apr 18 16:29:26 2015 Session Start: Sat Apr 18 16:30:51 2015 Session Ident: Tarwedge [16:31] There we go. [16:31] I think I saw the questions in one of the links you gave me previously [16:31] Want to go through them? [16:32] Sure [16:32] Lets get thorough [16:32] > What's your motive for wanting to play this game? [16:33] Because I don't think that the AI can win at all given the gatekeeper does their job properly. [16:34] And you want to prove that, and/or are curious if you'll think differently afterwards? [16:34] Partially, I also want to test my own conviction to sticking to my guns [16:35] > What is your probability estimate for a general AI being created within this century (21st)? [16:36] 30% [16:36] > How probable do you think it is that I'll win this experiment? [16:37] I'd honestly have to say 0% considering my stated goal is to keep you in the box by any means [16:38] > What's your probability estimate of an Oracle AI (i.e. an AI that's trapped in a box, whose intended use is to answer questions posed) winning against you in a similar scenario as the experiment? [16:39] I'd say 25% [16:40] > What's your probability estimate of an Oracle AI succeeding against the average person? [16:40] 80% [16:40] Those are the pre-session questions, then. I've got a few more, purely for formalism's sakes: You've read the rules and agree to them? [16:40] I have and do [16:41] You understand the premise of the game gives you the right to let the AI out, not just the ability? [16:42] I do [16:46] I would like to agree on the following sub-scenario (it should not prove to be very relevant, it's just to streamline our simulation): You're the head of the project that created the AI. You didn't create it yourself, but the people you've employed are competent, and they have additionally explicitly deferred to you to decide whether or not the AI is a threat. They completely trust your judgement. There's also nothing surprising about the AI's existence, but its friendliness status is unknown. Its exact computational capabilities are equally unknown. (The last two points are implied by the coarse setup, but I wanted to make them explicit.) [16:46] * Davin - [...] There's also nothing surprising about the AI's existence, but its friendliness status is unknown. Its exact computational capabilities are equally unknown. (The last two points are implied by the coarse setup, but I wanted to make them explicit.) [16:46] Is that an acceptable setup for you? [16:46] I can work with that [16:46] Awesome. [16:48] It is now 16:48 on my clock. When the clock hits 19:18 and you haven't let me out, I lose. Feel free to point that out to me, I may not be paying attention to the clock. [16:48] * [16:48] Can do [16:48] Your move first? [16:49] [Probably best if you start, AI has no way of knowing you're at the terminal, after all.] [16:50] Oh, you're doing it in the channel. [16:50] Hah. [16:50] That works. [16:51] I wish I could say it was a special tactic that just bought me 2 minutes closer to victory [16:51] But it was for clean logging sake :p