Future of Life Institute Podcast

Neither Yuval Noah Harari nor Max Tegmark need much in the way of introduction. Both are avant-garde thinkers at the forefront of 21st century discourse around science, technology, society and humanity’s future. This conversation represents a rare opportunity for two intellectual leaders to apply their combined expertise — in physics, artificial intelligence, history, philosophy and anthropology — to some of the most profound issues of our time. Max and Yuval bring their own macroscopic perspectives to this discussion of both cosmological and human history, exploring questions of consciousness, ethics, effective altruism, artificial intelligence, human extinction, emerging technologies and the role of myths and stories in fostering societal collaboration and meaning. We hope that you'll join the Future of Life Institute Podcast for our final conversation of 2019, as we look toward the future and the possibilities it holds for all of us. Topics discussed include: -Max and Yuval's views and intuitions about consciousness -How they ground and think about morality -Effective altruism and its cause areas of global health/poverty, animal suffering, and existential risk -The function of myths and stories in human society -How emerging science, technology, and global paradigms challenge the foundations of many of our stories -Technological risks of the 21st century You can find the page and transcript for this podcast here: https://futureoflife.org/2019/12/31/on-consciousness-morality-effective-altruism-myth-with-yuval-noah-harari-max-tegmark/ Timestamps: 0:00 Intro 3:14 Grounding morality and the need for a science of consciousness 11:45 The effective altruism community and it's main cause areas 13:05 Global health 14:44 Animal suffering and factory farming 17:38 Existential risk and the ethics of the long-term future 23:07 Nuclear war as a neglected global risk 24:45 On the risks of near-term AI and of artificial general intelligence and superintelligence 28:37 On creating new stories for the challenges of the 21st century 32:33 The risks of big data and AI enabled human hacking and monitoring 47:40 What does it mean to be human and what should we want to want? 52:29 On positive global visions for the future 59:29 Goodbyes and appreciations 01:00:20 Outro and supporting the Future of Life Institute Podcast This podcast is possible because of the support of listeners like you. If you found this conversation to be meaningful or valuable consider supporting it directly by donating at futureoflife.org/donate. Contributions like yours make these conversations possible.

As 2019 is coming to an end and the opportunities of 2020 begin to emerge, it's a great time to reflect on the past year and our reasons for hope in the year to come. We spend much of our time on this podcast discussing risks that will possibly lead to the extinction or the permanent and drastic curtailing of the potential of Earth-originating intelligent life. While this is important and useful, much has been done at FLI and in the broader world to address these issues in service of the common good. It can be skillful to reflect on this progress to see how far we've come, to develop hope for the future, and to map out our path ahead. This podcast is a special end of the year episode focused on meeting and introducing the FLI team, discussing what we've accomplished and are working on, and sharing our feelings and reasons for existential hope going into 2020 and beyond. Topics discussed include: -Introductions to the FLI team and our work -Motivations for our projects and existential risk mitigation efforts -The goals and outcomes of our work -Our favorite projects at FLI in 2019 -Optimistic directions for projects in 2020 -Reasons for existential hope going into 2020 and beyond You can find the page and transcript for this podcast here: https://futureoflife.org/2019/12/27/existential-hope-in-2020-and-beyond-with-the-fli-team/ Timestamps: 0:00 Intro 1:30 Meeting the Future of Life Institute team 18:30 Motivations for our projects and work at FLI 30:04 What we strive to result from our work at FLI 44:44 Favorite accomplishments of FLI in 2019 01:06:20 Project directions we are most excited about for 2020 01:19:43 Reasons for existential hope in 2020 and beyond 01:38:30 Outro

Jan Leike is a senior research scientist who leads the agent alignment team at DeepMind. His is one of three teams within their technical AGI group; each team focuses on different aspects of ensuring advanced AI systems are aligned and beneficial. Jan's journey in the field of AI has taken him from a PhD on a theoretical reinforcement learning agent called AIXI to empirical AI safety research focused on recursive reward modeling. This conversation explores his movement from theoretical to empirical AI safety research — why empirical safety research is important and how this has lead him to his work on recursive reward modeling. We also discuss research directions he's optimistic will lead to safely scalable systems, more facets of his own thinking, and other work being done at DeepMind.  Topics discussed in this episode include: -Theoretical and empirical AI safety research -Jan's and DeepMind's approaches to AI safety -Jan's work and thoughts on recursive reward modeling -AI safety benchmarking at DeepMind -The potential modularity of AGI -Comments on the cultural and intellectual differences between the AI safety and mainstream AI communities -Joining the DeepMind safety team You can find the page and transcript for this podcast here: https://futureoflife.org/2019/12/16/ai-alignment-podcast-on-deepmind-ai-safety-and-recursive-reward-modeling-with-jan-leike/ Timestamps:  0:00 intro 2:15 Jan's intellectual journey in computer science to AI safety 7:35 Transitioning from theoretical to empirical research 11:25 Jan's and DeepMind's approach to AI safety 17:23 Recursive reward modeling 29:26 Experimenting with recursive reward modeling 32:42 How recursive reward modeling serves AI safety 34:55 Pessimism about recursive reward modeling 38:35 How this research direction fits in the safety landscape 42:10 Can deep reinforcement learning get us to AGI? 42:50 How modular will AGI be? 44:25 Efforts at DeepMind for AI safety benchmarking 49:30 Differences between the AI safety and mainstream AI communities 55:15 Most exciting piece of empirical safety work in the next 5 years 56:35 Joining the DeepMind safety team

We could all be more altruistic and effective in our service of others, but what exactly is it that's stopping us? What are the biases and cognitive failures that prevent us from properly acting in service of existential risks, statistically large numbers of people, and long-term future considerations? How can we become more effective altruists? Stefan Schubert, a researcher at University of Oxford's Social Behaviour and Ethics Lab, explores questions like these at the intersection of moral psychology and philosophy. This conversation explores the steps that researchers like Stefan are taking to better understand psychology in service of doing the most good we can. Topics discussed include: -The psychology of existential risk, longtermism, effective altruism, and speciesism -Stefan's study "The Psychology of Existential Risks: Moral Judgements about Human Extinction" -Various works and studies Stefan Schubert has co-authored in these spaces -How this enables us to be more altruistic You can find the page and transcript for this podcast here: https://futureoflife.org/2019/12/02/the-psychology-of-existential-risk-and-effective-altruism-with-stefan-schubert/ Timestamps: 0:00 Intro 2:31 Stefan's academic and intellectual journey 5:20 How large is this field? 7:49 Why study the psychology of X-risk and EA? 16:54 What does a better understanding of psychology here enable? 21:10 What are the cognitive limitations psychology helps to elucidate? 23:12 Stefan's study "The Psychology of Existential Risks: Moral Judgements about Human Extinction" 34:45 Messaging on existential risk 37:30 Further areas of study 43:29 Speciesism 49:18 Further studies and work by Stefan

In this brief epilogue, Ariel reflects on what she's learned during the making of Not Cool, and the actions she'll be taking going forward.

It’s the Not Cool series finale, and by now we’ve heard from climate scientists, meteorologists, physicists, psychologists, epidemiologists and ecologists. We’ve gotten expert opinions on everything from mitigation and adaptation to security, policy and finance. Today, we’re tackling one final question: why should we trust them? Ariel is joined by Naomi Oreskes, Harvard professor and author of seven books, including the newly released "Why Trust Science?" Naomi lays out her case for why we should listen to experts, how we can identify the best experts in a field, and why we should be open to the idea of more than one type of "scientific method." She also discusses industry-funded science, scientists’ misconceptions about the public, and the role of the media in proliferating bad research. Topics discussed include: -Why Trust Science? -5 tenets of reliable science -How to decide which experts to trust -Why non-scientists can't debate science -Industry disinformation -How to communicate science -Fact-value distinction -Why people reject science -Shifting arguments from climate deniers -Individual vs. structural change -State- and city-level policy change

Most Americans believe in climate change — yet far too few are taking part in climate action. Many aren't even sure what effective climate action should look like. On Not Cool episode 25, Ariel is joined by Mario Molina, Executive Director of Protect our Winters, a non-profit aimed at increasing climate advocacy within the outdoor sports community. In this interview, Mario looks at climate activism more broadly: he explains where advocacy has fallen short, why it's important to hold corporations responsible before individuals, and what it would look like for the US to be a global leader on climate change. He also discusses the reforms we should be implementing, the hypocrisy allegations sometimes leveled at the climate advocacy community, and the misinformation campaign undertaken by the fossil fuel industry in the '90s. Topics discussed include: -Civic engagement and climate advocacy -Recent climate policy rollbacks -Local vs. global action -Energy and transportation reform -Agricultural reform -Overcoming lack of political will -Creating cultural change -Air travel and hypocrisy allegations -Individual vs. corporate carbon footprints -Collective action -Divestment -The unique influence of the US

Defunding the fossil fuel industry is one of the biggest factors in addressing climate change and lowering carbon emissions. But with international financing and powerful lobbyists on their side, fossil fuel companies often seem out of public reach. On Not Cool episode 24, Ariel is joined by Ellen Quigley and Natalie Jones, who explain why that’s not the case, and what you can do — without too much effort — to stand up to them. Ellen and Natalie, both researchers at the University of Cambridge’s Centre for the Study of Existential Risk (CSER), explain what government regulation should look like, how minimal interactions with our banks could lead to fewer fossil fuel investments, and why divestment isn't enough on its own. They also discuss climate justice, Universal Ownership theory, and the international climate regime. Topics discussed include: -Divestment -Universal Ownership theory -Demand side and supply side regulation -Impact investing -Nationally determined contributions -Low greenhouse gas emission development strategies -Just transition -Economic diversification For more on universal ownership: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3457205

Wendell Wallach has been at the forefront of contemporary emerging technology issues for decades now. As an interdisciplinary thinker, he has engaged at the intersections of ethics, governance, AI, bioethics, robotics, and philosophy since the beginning formulations of what we now know as AI alignment were being codified. Wendell began with a broad interest in the ethics of emerging technology and has since become focused on machine ethics and AI governance. This conversation with Wendell explores his intellectual journey and participation in these fields.  Topics discussed in this episode include: -Wendell’s intellectual journey in machine ethics and AI governance  -The history of machine ethics and alignment considerations -How machine ethics and AI alignment serve to produce beneficial AI  -Soft law and hard law for shaping AI governance  -Wendell’s and broader efforts for the global governance of AI -Social and political mechanisms for mitigating the risks of AI  -Wendell’s forthcoming book You can find the page and transcript here: https://futureoflife.org/2019/11/15/machine-ethics-and-ai-governance-with-wendell-wallach/ Important timestamps:  0:00 intro 2:50 Wendell's evolution in work and thought 10:45 AI alignment and machine ethics 27:05 Wendell's focus on AI governance 34:04 How much can soft law shape hard law? 37:27 What does hard law consist of? 43:25 Contextualizing the International Congress for the Governance of AI 45:00 How AI governance efforts might fail 58:40 AGI governance 1:05:00 Wendell's forthcoming book

Though climate change and global warming are often used synonymously, there’s a different kind of climate change that also deserves attention: nuclear winter. A period of extreme global cooling that would likely follow a major nuclear exchange, nuclear winter is as of now — unlike global warming — still avoidable. But as Cold War era treaties break down and new nations gain nuclear capabilities, it's essential that we understand the potential climate impacts of nuclear war. On Not Cool Episode 23, Ariel talks to Brian Toon, one of the five authors of the 1983 paper that first outlined the concept of nuclear winter. Brian discusses the global tensions that could lead to a nuclear exchange, the process by which such an exchange would drastically reduce the temperature of the planet, and the implications of this kind of drastic temperature drop for humanity. He also explains how nuclear weapons have evolved since their invention, why our nuclear arsenal doesn't need an upgrade, and why modern building materials would make nuclear winter worse. Topics discussed include: -Causes and impacts of nuclear winter -History of nuclear weapons development -History of disarmament -Current nuclear arsenals -Mutually assured destruction -Fires and climate -Greenhouse gases vs. aerosols -Black carbon and plastics -India/Pakistan tensions -US/Russia tensions -Unknowns -Global food storage and shortages For more: https://futureoflife.org/2016/10/31/nuclear-winter-robock-toon-podcast/ https://futureoflife.org/2017/04/27/climate-change-podcast-toon-trenberth/