>Given that Yudkowsky has gone to considerable lengths (The Sequences, LessWrong, HPMOR, SIAI/MIRI...) to convince people that this inequality does NOT hold
The AI is allowed to lie though, so do you not think he's capable of a false argument which "proves" the opposite in specific circumstances, especially when hammered home with enough emotional manipulation?
But then the person knows that the AI is lying to them. This is why I think it must be a trick: the whole thing seems so simple. The AI is lying, so you just ignore all its arguments and keep saying "no." This is why I keep referring to his followers somewhat dismissively: the only possible reason I can see is that their worldview requires them to engage seriously and fairly with every idea they come across. Most people are not burdened with this.
The AI is allowed to lie though, so do you not think he's capable of a false argument which "proves" the opposite in specific circumstances, especially when hammered home with enough emotional manipulation?
But then the person knows that the AI is lying to them. This is why I think it must be a trick: the whole thing seems so simple. The AI is lying, so you just ignore all its arguments and keep saying "no." This is why I keep referring to his followers somewhat dismissively: the only possible reason I can see is that their worldview requires them to engage seriously and fairly with every idea they come across. Most people are not burdened with this.
I really wish I knew how he did it.