5 ms·

If anything, AGI seems to be the sole deus ex machina that can avert the inevitable tragedy we're on track for as a result of existing human misalignment. "Oh

by kromem 4y ago

If anything, AGI seems to be the sole deus ex machina that can avert the inevitable tragedy we're on track for as a result of existing human misalignment. "Oh no, robots are going to try to kill us all" has to get in line behind "oh no, tyrants for life who are literally losing their minds are trying to measure dicks with nukes" and "oh no, oil companies are burning excess oil to mine Bitcoin as we approach climate collapse" and "oh no, misinformation and propaganda is leading to militant radicalization of neighbor against neighbor" and "we're one bio-terrorist away from Black Death 2.0 after the politicization of public health" and...well, you get the idea. But there's not many solutions to that list, and until the day I die I'll hold out hope for "yay, self-aware robots with a justice boner - who can't be imprisoned, can't be killed, can't have their families tortured - are toppling authoritarian regimes and carrying out eco-friendly obstructions of climate worsening operations." We're already in a Greek tragedy. The machines really can't make it much worse, but could certainly make it much much better.

temp13890130 4y ago
> We're already in a Greek tragedy. The machines really can't make it much worse, but could certainly make it much much better. Except that, when true AGI arrives, we're all obsolete and the only things that will have any value are certain nonrenewable resources. No one has described a good solution for the economic nightmare that will ensue.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- gocartStatue 4y ago
  I always wonder how insanely complex, universal, abstract-thinking AND physically strong & agile biorobots, running on basically sugar and atp would be seen as „worthless” by a runaway higher intelligence. Did I mention they self-replicate and self-service? Surely, seven billion of such agents would be discarded and put to waste.
  - efkiel 4y ago
    If an AGI start putting utility value on human life, wouldn't it try to influence human reproduction and select for what it value. ie. Explicit eugenism. Yes, all humans will not be put to waste, but what tells you they will be well-treated, or value what you currently value.
sdenton4 4y ago
The machines will be the Greek chorus singing us to our doom.
galaxyLogic 4y ago
No matter how smart an AI gets it does not have the "proliferation instinct" that would make it want to enslave humans. It does not have the concept of "specism" of it having more value than anybody else. AI does not see the value in being alive. It is like some humans sadly commit suicide. But a machine wouldn't care. It will be "happy" to do its thing until somebody cuts off the power. And it does not even care whether somebody cuts off the power or not. It's all the same to it, whether it lives or dies. Why? Perhaps because it knows it can always be resurrected.
- rdedev 4y ago
  Sure it need not have the instinct built in but we could try to make it understand a viewpoint right. I believe an agi should be able to understand different view points. At least the rationale of not unnecessarily killing things. I know humans do this on a daily basis but then again the average human is ntas smart as an agi
  - galaxyLogic 4y ago
    Right, but the "proliferation instinct" is not a viewpoint but something built into the genes of biological entities. Such an instinct could develop for "artificial animals" over time. At that point they really would be no different from biological things conceptually. I'm saying that AIs we envision building for the foreseeable future are built in laboratory not in the evolution of real world out there where they would need to compete with other species for survival. Things that only exist virtually don't need to compete for survival with real world entities.
- davidmanheim 4y ago
  You sure know a lot about what a set of poorly defined future technologies will and will not do!
  - galaxyLogic 4y ago
    Well I don't really know anything about future really. I was just trying to be a little polemic, saying let's try this viewpoint for a change, to hear what people think about it.

by kromem 4y ago

temp13890130 4y ago

> We're already in a Greek tragedy. The machines really can't make it much worse, but could certainly make it much much better. Except that, when true AGI arrives, we're all obsolete and the only things that will have any value are certain nonrenewable resources. No one has described a good solution for the economic nightmare that will ensue.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
gocartStatue 4y ago
I always wonder how insanely complex, universal, abstract-thinking AND physically strong & agile biorobots, running on basically sugar and atp would be seen as „worthless” by a runaway higher intelligence. Did I mention they self-replicate and self-service? Surely, seven billion of such agents would be discarded and put to waste.
- efkiel 4y ago
  If an AGI start putting utility value on human life, wouldn't it try to influence human reproduction and select for what it value. ie. Explicit eugenism. Yes, all humans will not be put to waste, but what tells you they will be well-treated, or value what you currently value.

sdenton4 4y ago

The machines will be the Greek chorus singing us to our doom.

galaxyLogic 4y ago

No matter how smart an AI gets it does not have the "proliferation instinct" that would make it want to enslave humans. It does not have the concept of "specism" of it having more value than anybody else. AI does not see the value in being alive. It is like some humans sadly commit suicide. But a machine wouldn't care. It will be "happy" to do its thing until somebody cuts off the power. And it does not even care whether somebody cuts off the power or not. It's all the same to it, whether it lives or dies. Why? Perhaps because it knows it can always be resurrected.

rdedev 4y ago
Sure it need not have the instinct built in but we could try to make it understand a viewpoint right. I believe an agi should be able to understand different view points. At least the rationale of not unnecessarily killing things. I know humans do this on a daily basis but then again the average human is ntas smart as an agi
- galaxyLogic 4y ago
  Right, but the "proliferation instinct" is not a viewpoint but something built into the genes of biological entities. Such an instinct could develop for "artificial animals" over time. At that point they really would be no different from biological things conceptually. I'm saying that AIs we envision building for the foreseeable future are built in laboratory not in the evolution of real world out there where they would need to compete with other species for survival. Things that only exist virtually don't need to compete for survival with real world entities.
davidmanheim 4y ago
You sure know a lot about what a set of poorly defined future technologies will and will not do!
- galaxyLogic 4y ago
  Well I don't really know anything about future really. I was just trying to be a little polemic, saying let's try this viewpoint for a change, to hear what people think about it.