3 ms·
Do you not think there isn't still a different between something which can become sentient, somehow start operating outside of the computer it lives in and on a
by bamboozled 4y ago
Do you not think there isn't still a different between something which can become sentient, somehow start operating outside of the computer it lives in and on and on ?
I mean it would have to be a pretty big leap from and algorithm optimized to do "something" to an algorithm which understands how to operate interdependently and then escape it's box and then start to do the wrong thing, and to add to that, be smart enough to stop us from turning it off before doing too much damage.
Actually curious what people think about this?
- 6gvONxR4sf7o 4y agoI think the whole idea of sentience is a red herring for reasoning about the potential for AI to cause harm. For example, take the title of the article we're talking about. You could take it with a dose of anthropomorphization and interpret it with human-like intent and sentience, or you could take it as an analogy that we might formally define closer to "not worried about AI that passes Turing test, but AI that fails for some reason other than the ability to succeed (and that other reason requires the evaluator to be misled)." So is sentience far away? No idea. Is misaligned AI a near-term worry? Yeah, absolutely. And "misaligned" doesn't have to be as extreme as 'makes humans extinct.' It can be as simple as 'is an asshole' or 'inexplicably swerves into the other lane 0.01% of the time' or something else we don't want in the system.
- bamboozled 4y agoGood points, I almost feel like we have this unusual "need" to build an asshole AI to find out what it's like to have an asshole AI in our lives...kind of like how people don't want to ski into a tree, but for some reason develop target fixation, then ski into...the tree.