Simone Sturniolo

Senior Software Engineer for scientific applications. My opinions don't represent my employer's.
Now also on Mastodon: @[email protected]

[Simone Sturniolo @SturnioloSimone]

@Aging_Scientist @michhuan > Lifespan, if we cure all diseases, would be 1-10 thousand years

That's patently false. It would take far more than just curing all diseases. It would need curing aging itself and giving the body the means to regenerate all the stuff that would simply degrade over that time.

[Simone Sturniolo @SturnioloSimone]

@RokoMijic @maxtempers Some of the other stuff is cheap and effective (reflective paint, insulation). But yes ventilation specifically is a pointless step, especially for a private home.

[Simone Sturniolo @SturnioloSimone]

@Aging_Scientist @michhuan This paper assumes things such as "with AGI life expectancy would be 1400 years", but... how? What kind of life? If it's an upload, how do you know that many people would prefer that to being dead? My impression is many would think it horrible, right now.

[Simone Sturniolo @SturnioloSimone]

@Aging_Scientist @michhuan Plenty of people don't like even using current AI? In fact there's a lot of fierce opposition to it. But even putting that aside, enjoying Claude isn't the same as being ok with AGI/ASI. Where does the assumption that everyone would be ok with this come from?

[Simone Sturniolo @SturnioloSimone]

@Aging_Scientist @michhuan I don't think that it makes sense to be accelerationist if you care about *current* humans at all; it all depends on the specific risks. The logic of "if we don't discover immortality within X years then we're all dying anyway so screw it" isn't how most people think.

[Simone Sturniolo @SturnioloSimone]

This seems like a potentially great initiative! I'd seen mention of some of these technologies at the peak of COVID and it does seem like there might be cheap wins there - low hanging fruit we're really not grabbing due to not paying attention, mostly.

https://t.co/CvGih1rf4G

[Simone Sturniolo @SturnioloSimone]

@kanzure @StiberAdam I think one finds that we treat mice kind of badly, from the viewpoint of the mice. The best thing we've done for the mice is the fact that we are so prosperous, our trash is their treasure to scavenge. Whenever we turn our attention to them it's usually to kill them though.

[Simone Sturniolo @SturnioloSimone]

@Aging_Scientist @michhuan I mean, I think "we're humans so we hold for our own side" makes entirely sense.

Besides pretty much by definition any kinder and gentler species wouldn't want to rule the universe by replacing us, it would just coexist.

[Simone Sturniolo @SturnioloSimone]

@gfodor (though I worry: addresses *for now*. It feels like there's a pre-AI and a post-AI world, and just like all steel after nuclear weapons is contaminated, I wonder what's it going to be like once no one writes any more StackOverflow posts for LLMs to be trained on)

[Simone Sturniolo @SturnioloSimone]

@gfodor The bigger thing IMO is the absolute maze of libraries, dependencies, APIs, a good 70% of which will be poorly documented and required tracking down information through obscure StackOverflow questions. That was a bigger time sink than almost anything else, which AI addresses.

[Simone Sturniolo @SturnioloSimone]

@thedillona @hankgreen But that's more logistics. In a good scenario this could be a good thing. But I'd be confident that it won't be quite as cheap or scale up so much that soon.

[Simone Sturniolo @SturnioloSimone]

@thedillona @hankgreen There are some details in their plans at the very least that are plain unrealistic (e.g. the number of scans they plan to do by 2031 is way too high for it to work as they describe, and in fact to be compatible with as simple a thing as *periodically cycling the pool water*).

[Simone Sturniolo @SturnioloSimone]

@UnrealRealist19 @SimonLermenAI I think naturally here = just let companies compete and race with each other driven purely by short-term economic incentives, without anything to act as friction or channelling that effort in specific avenues.

[Simone Sturniolo @SturnioloSimone]

@Scholars_Stage @slatestarcodex The correct analogy is more that you have several demonologists researching the portal, and *if they get the runes right*, they get to keep the monsters bound and obedient.

So you have both the risk of rampaging monsters and the risk of bad people with a loyal army of them.

[Simone Sturniolo @SturnioloSimone]

@ExactlyBackward @nosilverv The sleight of hand is the point though. The essence of the problem is that depending on presentation (the neutrality of the button in this case) the outcome can change. And it's a question of psychology, which requires understanding that.

[Simone Sturniolo @SturnioloSimone]

@benjamin_horne I think generally cult leader want to speak in a way that sounds warm and friendly and empathetic, this sounds like the worst possible way to talk if you're trying to be a cult leader.

[Simone Sturniolo @SturnioloSimone]

@GuiveAssadi More control over the house, more long term reliability, and not ALL of my money is going straight into a black hole without hope of return (just the mortgage interest part I guess). In retirement, having to still pay rent vs having a fully repaid house is a major difference.

[Simone Sturniolo @SturnioloSimone]

@davidmanheim @QiaochuYuan https://t.co/IRlhGqoaq5

In this example, the problem isn't television. The problem is people making decisions about things that they have no stake on, and thus doing so casually and superficially.

[MAYA @ArsAlendi]

“Meanwhile, sitting in our dark rooms ingesting images of Borneo forests, we lose feeling even for the forests near our homes.”

[Simone Sturniolo @SturnioloSimone]

@davidmanheim @QiaochuYuan Like from what I get, Mander among other things argues the problem with television is that it removes people away from sensory reality. But you could say the same of books, or really, any way of conveying information other than "direct perception".