Re: 180 IQ idiot (Re: META: IQ distributions)

From: Phillip Huggan (
Date: Thu Nov 24 2005 - 19:16:40 MST

My original point was regarding recruiting high IQ AGI programmers; that IQ is only a small part of what should be desired. A 180 IQ individual who was in a position to influence to some degree, CO2 emmisions, couldn't even grasp a concept as simple as Expected Value. My qualm was with IQ 180's process, not with his understanding of climate change. If he can't understand that dangerous outcomes might result from actions in the face of uncertain information, maybe some sort of Actuarian training should be a part of the skill set of AGI programmers towards the later stages of program development. And Tennessee is right that this is probably not sl4, esp. if nuke-winters and nuke-wars didn't make the grade earlier in the year... but what the hell :)
    I know of a variety of feedbacks relating to CO2 levels vs global temps, there are positive and negative feedbacks, but overall the positive appear to be more powerful. Please provide the data to show how rising temps cause a rise in CO2 levels. This chart of Vostok ice cores seems to show they cause eachother:
  as does the study referenced in the final paragraph of this Wiki page:
  A simple overlay of CO2 levels and temperatures over the last two hundred years demonstrates the same thing. Note that it is not necessary to understand all the elements of complex climate processes to see a coorelation between rising temps and rising CO2 levels.
    If a singularity happens over the next 2-3 decades, this isn't AGI relevant except that it might dry up some funding sources, and it forms a very small component of the dangers of the world we expect in the absence of an AGI (these dangers need to be weighed in deciding when it is safe to turn AGI on). But I think the issue might form a politically and socially powerful component of a MNT public relations campaign, if desired (MNT being a climate change solution).

  **J.A Rogerss wrote**
  A common misconception fostered because it is useful to some
ideological factions. When global temps rise, CO2 levels tend to
rise, not the other way around.

All the ice core data clearly indicates that CO2 levels are
*trailing* indicators of global temperature i.e. CO2 levels neither
rise nor fall until after the temperature has done the same. In
other words, there is more evidence that higher temperatures cause
higher atmospheric CO2 levels than the other way around with respect
to the global climate.

 Yahoo! Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:53 MDT