Discussions of existential risk not uncommonly draw their categories, choices, consequences and strategies from movies, books and television shows.
Not researched Checkable, but outside the sample that was researched.
Factual: Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?
Cite this claim
Eliezer Yudkowsky, “Discussions of existential risk not uncommonly draw their categories, choices, consequences and strategies from movies, books and television shows.” (said 2008). Verdict: not researched. Reliability API, claim c_6b3073f53382, method 0.1.0+c876030c, dataset release v1.1.2. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_6b3073f53382
This claim is in dataset release v1.1.2, with the same verdict.
Reply to this claim
More factual claims by Eliezer Yudkowsky
-
Mostly true
“even most scientists in the field had no idea how to build a nuclear bomb”
-
Mostly true
“Today there is still no shield that can deflect a nuclear explosion;”
As of 2008 there is no shield that can deflect a nuclear explosion.
-
Mixed
“I was observing that obvious-seeming hypothesis myself, sometime around the time of GPT 3.5.”
Yudkowsky himself observed the persona-selection-like hypothesis around the time of GPT 3.5.
-
Mostly true
“The test-passing preference stands on its own once formed.”
-
Mostly true
“LLMs surely have neural circuits they learned to model text streams from fictional and nonfictional personas that are not lying, deceiving, cheating.”
Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts are made.