文章讨论了一种被称为‘安全游戏’的概念，在这个情境中，人们试图采取行动以减少死亡风险，但过程充满混乱。一些风险规避、不太追求权力的人参与后，情况可能变好或变坏，还提到了一些如政治运动等方面的情况，以及解释黑箱却被用来制造更强黑箱的现象，最后作者对人们在这种情况下如何做决策表示好奇。

🎯‘安全游戏’是试图让每个人或自己减少预期死亡风险的行动，但其过程极为混乱，如阿利马棋般难以捉摸。一些风险规避、不太追求权力的人参与阅读相关序列后，死亡风险可能降低十倍，但奥尔特曼先生阅读后，风险可能又增加十倍，情况反复不定。

🚩发起一个可爱的政治运动，然而反运动可能会更加可行，效果可能是原运动的十倍。试图弄清楚和解释一些黑箱问题，但解释可能会被立即用来制造一个更强大的黑箱，如曼巴可能出现的情况。

❓作者对人们在这种复杂且充满不确定性的情况下如何做出决策感到好奇，同时怀疑是否真的存在一些原则可以遵循，希望听到其他人的看法，但自己在此问题上选择暂不给出答案。

Published on September 29, 2024 12:03 PM GMT

Let's call the thing where you try to take actions that make everyone/yourself less dead (on expectation) the "safety game". This game is annoyingly chaotic, kind of like Arimaa.

You write the sequences then  some  risk-averse not-very-power-seeking nerds read it and you're 10x less dead. Then Mr. Altman reads it and you're 10x more dead. Then maybe (or not) there's a backlash and the numbers change again.

You start a cute political movement but the countermovement ends up being 10x more actionable (e/acc).

You try to figure out and explain some of the black box but your explanation is immediately used to make a stronger black box. (Mamba possibly.)

Etc.

I'm curious what folks use as toeholds for making decisions in such circumstances. Or if some folks believe there are  actually  principles then I would like to hear them, but I suspect the fog is too thick. I'll skip giving my own answer on this one.

Discuss