5 ms·

> If you think humans as AI systems Humans are not "AI" systems but infinitely more complex. Which is why, among other things, humans are capable of driving a

> If you think humans as AI systems Humans are not "AI" systems but infinitely more complex. Which is why, among other things, humans are capable of driving a car safely while "AI" is not. I for one would feel disgusted with myself if I were to discover that I'm nothing more than the output of a reward function. YMMV.

Brave-Steak 7y ago
What makes you think we are anything more than the output of a reward function? Dopamine and other hormones function as our reward system and are so fundamental and drive effectively all of our behaviours and our learning from the moment we were born. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reward_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reward_system https://academic.oup.com/endo/article/151/5/1978/2456493 https://academic.oup.com/endo/article/151/5/1978/2456493
- lr4444lr 7y ago
  The fact that it disgusts him, and that you in turn might appreciate the irony of the reward system actually hating itself is pretty strong evidence that there's more to the human experience than biologically reinforced operant conditioning.
  - Brave-Steak 7y ago
    > is pretty strong evidence that there's more to the human experience than biologically reinforced operant conditioning. I'm not sure that follows. The reward system can't produce output by itself. It requires an input. Any input. It requires an environment, a context. And one of the possible outputs is, well, his point of view. But that doesn't invalidate the reward system. It just shows how unpredictable it is.
    - mewpmewp2 7y ago
      There are layers upon layers in that reward system, although everything should be explainable. So how did the reward system come to a point that it does not want to believe it will die at some point and for that reason it had to create several imaginary stories such as religion etc? I wonder if it maybe has to do with group dynamics? In order for some conscious systems to be controlled by more powerful entities they would have had to been fed delusions in order for their reward systems to be happy and not feel cheated upon. Eg reward system wants to maximize survivability and when it is controlled by other systems in power it has to be led lies that after death it will be better so all in all the reward system gets so skewed that eventually it is likely to believe any other type of delusions as well. Such as for example that itself is not a reward system and if it was it would hate itself. So in the end are all delusions defense mechanisms for that reward system to accept that things are unfair, this reward system might not be able to achieve the desired goals so it has to adapt itself? But why can't this reward system just hibernate without delusions? Edit: actually I think coming to hate itself as a reward system is part of societal pressures. Society pressures each reward system to do common good for that society and creates morals. These morals have been created in a manner that one has to be something more than a selfish creature or otherwise gets shunned so reward system will create all those thoughts in order to avoid having to face selfish desires vs societal pressures head on?
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    Why? That only suggests that the reward system can hate itself. It's not out of scope, much like a computer being able to self-diagnose some of its workings isn't a weird thing.
nippoo 7y ago
The human "reward function" is likely more complex than current AI - and not always particularly logical (though vaguely correlated to survival of your own genes!) - but it's probably naïve to assume that we're anything more complicated than a very advanced automaton trying to optimise a reward function...
- s_kilk 7y ago
  I think it's dreadfully naive to assume there's a single, identifiable reward function.
  - ben_w 7y ago
    You can always map lots of small reward functions onto a single large one. For a fictitious example, total_reward = sin(time_of_day) × dopamine_reward + (oxytocin_reward / adrenaline_reward)
    - platz 7y ago
      How do you even add them.. it's like asking what is the utility of the statue of liberty plus the utility of NAFTA? Just because it's a mathematicians/economists wish doesn't mean it's correct. Why did the drunken man look under the streetlight for his keys? "Didn't loose them here, but that's where the light is"
      - TeMPOraL 7y ago
        > How do you even add them.. In dollars. It's literally what currency is for. Of course there's no one set of dollar values for most items. They very much depend on a context. But in a particular, well-defined context, you can very much convert both Statue of Liberty and NAFTA to dollars and sum them up to something that makes sense in that context. > Why did the drunken man look under the streetlight for his keys? "Didn't loose them here, but that's where the light is" Well, drunk people tend to have problems calculating expected value.
ben_w 7y ago
I sympathise with your feelings of disgust, as I hated the idea of hypnosis and psychological research since I was a teenager. Perhaps “disgust” is the wrong word for me, as I felt understanding works take away the magic and wonder and mystery of what it means to be able to feel like I exist. I still don’t like the idea of being able to modify my own low-level preferences in a meaningful way, but I have come to accept that pretending it’s not a thing can make it unreal. (Also: AI is about as good as humans at driving cars, despite the computers in self driving cars being nowhere near as complicated as even just the bits of your brain that are involved in driving).
INGELRII 7y ago
> I for one would feel disgusted with myself if I were to discover that I'm nothing more than the output of a reward function. YMMV. Very interesting and heavy statement to say in this context. (I think your comment should be upvoted just to bring this honest description of how feelings and self-image interact with our thinking)
- mewpmewp2 7y ago
  Why be disgusted over something that honestly seems pretty obvious. (unless there are delusions in my logic)? What else could there be other than particles interacting with each other? And if there are particles interacting with each other how could it be anything else than a reward system? What is the alternative? Even if there was something non physical like a soul what leads decision making for that soul?
Ensorceled 7y ago
Ironically, disgust is part of your internal reward system.
inscionent 7y ago
Have you seen humans drive cars?
- classified 7y ago
  Ha, you do have a point here, of course. But for comparison, have you seen "AI" drive cars?
- olooney 7y ago
  Humans are capable of driving cars safely. Many people go their whole lives without ever being at fault for a single accident. Some drivers, especially professionals, practice defensive driving at avoid or preempt accidents where they would not have been at fault. My own father, for example, has been the "n+1" car in an n-car pile up on more than one occasion, as he was the only one leaving a safe distance. He avoids all distractions and pays attention to the behavior of other cars on the road. He gives advice like, "don't just look at the brake lights - look for the car to pitch forward because that means it's braking hard and you should be too." Another time I saw him avoid a serious accident even though he was in the passengers seat simply by telling the driver, who had just taken their foot off the brake after the life turned green and was about to enter the intersection, "wait, stop, that guy's going to run the red light." Note that this was before the other car had actually done so - he just noticed it was slowing down. If everyone drove like that, cars would be safer than airplanes. So it's not a cognitive issue. Almost anyone can learn to drive a car very safely, they just choose not to.
gbrown 7y ago
> I for one would feel disgusted with myself if I were to discover that I'm nothing more than the output of a reward function. YMMV. Well we use different words for it, but I’m not sure I understand the alternative? The brain is a physical thing, and it’s (in the broader physiological/hormonal environment) making the decisions. “Reward function” sounds reductive, but obviously it’s a much more complex phenomena than all current human created AI. We’re not just minimizing a sum of squares, if that’s what you mean.

Brave-Steak 7y ago

What makes you think we are anything more than the output of a reward function? Dopamine and other hormones function as our reward system and are so fundamental and drive effectively all of our behaviours and our learning from the moment we were born. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reward_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reward_system https://academic.oup.com/endo/article/151/5/1978/2456493 https://academic.oup.com/endo/article/151/5/1978/2456493

lr4444lr 7y ago
The fact that it disgusts him, and that you in turn might appreciate the irony of the reward system actually hating itself is pretty strong evidence that there's more to the human experience than biologically reinforced operant conditioning.
- Brave-Steak 7y ago
  > is pretty strong evidence that there's more to the human experience than biologically reinforced operant conditioning. I'm not sure that follows. The reward system can't produce output by itself. It requires an input. Any input. It requires an environment, a context. And one of the possible outputs is, well, his point of view. But that doesn't invalidate the reward system. It just shows how unpredictable it is.
  - mewpmewp2 7y ago
    There are layers upon layers in that reward system, although everything should be explainable. So how did the reward system come to a point that it does not want to believe it will die at some point and for that reason it had to create several imaginary stories such as religion etc? I wonder if it maybe has to do with group dynamics? In order for some conscious systems to be controlled by more powerful entities they would have had to been fed delusions in order for their reward systems to be happy and not feel cheated upon. Eg reward system wants to maximize survivability and when it is controlled by other systems in power it has to be led lies that after death it will be better so all in all the reward system gets so skewed that eventually it is likely to believe any other type of delusions as well. Such as for example that itself is not a reward system and if it was it would hate itself. So in the end are all delusions defense mechanisms for that reward system to accept that things are unfair, this reward system might not be able to achieve the desired goals so it has to adapt itself? But why can't this reward system just hibernate without delusions? Edit: actually I think coming to hate itself as a reward system is part of societal pressures. Society pressures each reward system to do common good for that society and creates morals. These morals have been created in a manner that one has to be something more than a selfish creature or otherwise gets shunned so reward system will create all those thoughts in order to avoid having to face selfish desires vs societal pressures head on?
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  Why? That only suggests that the reward system can hate itself. It's not out of scope, much like a computer being able to self-diagnose some of its workings isn't a weird thing.

nippoo 7y ago

The human "reward function" is likely more complex than current AI - and not always particularly logical (though vaguely correlated to survival of your own genes!) - but it's probably naïve to assume that we're anything more complicated than a very advanced automaton trying to optimise a reward function...

s_kilk 7y ago
I think it's dreadfully naive to assume there's a single, identifiable reward function.
- ben_w 7y ago
  You can always map lots of small reward functions onto a single large one. For a fictitious example, total_reward = sin(time_of_day) × dopamine_reward + (oxytocin_reward / adrenaline_reward)
  - platz 7y ago
    How do you even add them.. it's like asking what is the utility of the statue of liberty plus the utility of NAFTA? Just because it's a mathematicians/economists wish doesn't mean it's correct. Why did the drunken man look under the streetlight for his keys? "Didn't loose them here, but that's where the light is"
    - TeMPOraL 7y ago
      > How do you even add them.. In dollars. It's literally what currency is for. Of course there's no one set of dollar values for most items. They very much depend on a context. But in a particular, well-defined context, you can very much convert both Statue of Liberty and NAFTA to dollars and sum them up to something that makes sense in that context. > Why did the drunken man look under the streetlight for his keys? "Didn't loose them here, but that's where the light is" Well, drunk people tend to have problems calculating expected value.

ben_w 7y ago

I sympathise with your feelings of disgust, as I hated the idea of hypnosis and psychological research since I was a teenager. Perhaps “disgust” is the wrong word for me, as I felt understanding works take away the magic and wonder and mystery of what it means to be able to feel like I exist. I still don’t like the idea of being able to modify my own low-level preferences in a meaningful way, but I have come to accept that pretending it’s not a thing can make it unreal. (Also: AI is about as good as humans at driving cars, despite the computers in self driving cars being nowhere near as complicated as even just the bits of your brain that are involved in driving).

INGELRII 7y ago

> I for one would feel disgusted with myself if I were to discover that I'm nothing more than the output of a reward function. YMMV. Very interesting and heavy statement to say in this context. (I think your comment should be upvoted just to bring this honest description of how feelings and self-image interact with our thinking)

mewpmewp2 7y ago
Why be disgusted over something that honestly seems pretty obvious. (unless there are delusions in my logic)? What else could there be other than particles interacting with each other? And if there are particles interacting with each other how could it be anything else than a reward system? What is the alternative? Even if there was something non physical like a soul what leads decision making for that soul?

Ensorceled 7y ago

Ironically, disgust is part of your internal reward system.

inscionent 7y ago

Have you seen humans drive cars?

classified 7y ago
Ha, you do have a point here, of course. But for comparison, have you seen "AI" drive cars?
olooney 7y ago
Humans are capable of driving cars safely. Many people go their whole lives without ever being at fault for a single accident. Some drivers, especially professionals, practice defensive driving at avoid or preempt accidents where they would not have been at fault. My own father, for example, has been the "n+1" car in an n-car pile up on more than one occasion, as he was the only one leaving a safe distance. He avoids all distractions and pays attention to the behavior of other cars on the road. He gives advice like, "don't just look at the brake lights - look for the car to pitch forward because that means it's braking hard and you should be too." Another time I saw him avoid a serious accident even though he was in the passengers seat simply by telling the driver, who had just taken their foot off the brake after the life turned green and was about to enter the intersection, "wait, stop, that guy's going to run the red light." Note that this was before the other car had actually done so - he just noticed it was slowing down. If everyone drove like that, cars would be safer than airplanes. So it's not a cognitive issue. Almost anyone can learn to drive a car very safely, they just choose not to.

gbrown 7y ago

> I for one would feel disgusted with myself if I were to discover that I'm nothing more than the output of a reward function. YMMV. Well we use different words for it, but I’m not sure I understand the alternative? The brain is a physical thing, and it’s (in the broader physiological/hormonal environment) making the decisions. “Reward function” sounds reductive, but obviously it’s a much more complex phenomena than all current human created AI. We’re not just minimizing a sum of squares, if that’s what you mean.