4 ms·
Yes point 2 is the weak one. Aren't humans/biological life a counterexample? Simple bacteria are clearly maximizing agents, and cyanobacteria did infact almos
by aeternum 4y ago
Yes point 2 is the weak one.
Aren't humans/biological life a counterexample? Simple bacteria are clearly maximizing agents, and cyanobacteria did infact almost destroy all life on earth by filling the entire planet with toxic oxygen.
We've known how to improve ourselves via selective breeding yet vanishingly few humans are proponents. We and other intelligent animals have a wide variety of goals, and even share food across species.
The evidence just doesn't seem to support this concept of Basic Drives. If anything, the evidence (and common sense) seems to suggest that the more intelligent the organism, the more easily and more often it ignores its basic drives.
- gonehome 4y agoNatural selection and biology have different constraints that limit things (and even then often selection can cause extinction) Intellectual capability and alignment are orthogonal - the former doesn’t get you the latter for free. Most people new to this issue don’t intuitively grasp this at first.
- aeternum 4y agoWhat evidence do you have that intellectual ability and alignment are orthogonal? Remember that ML models are also subject to selection. If they're not useful/beneficial to us, we stop running them.