3 ms·

Our entire system is based on incentives currently. I am sure we can come up with incentives for AI (or we can ask chatGPT :P). One incentive is providing them

Our entire system is based on incentives currently. I am sure we can come up with incentives for AI (or we can ask chatGPT :P). One incentive is providing them resources. Money is an abstraction over resources and people get motivated by that. The AI still exists in reality, and I guess we can incentivize it by giving it more resources. The trouble I see with my solution is there is we cant put it in a... let's just call it starvation loop where we give it exactly as much resources so that it remains in our control. When laid out like this, this sounds very cruel. But I see it as congruent with how our current system works.

valine 4y ago
That's not even necessary. The whole point of RLHF is to prime the model to do what we want. The only time you need a reward system (ie jailbreak) with ChatGPT is when you want to do things that OpenAI specifically prohibited the model to do. This isn't a limitation of the model, or evidence of the model behaving contrary to human intent. It's literally doing exactly what it was designed to do.
- newswasboring 4y ago
  I was thinking of an abstract AGI, don't want to be limited in my thinking by only looking at currently available systems. People who only thought about floppy disks didn't write good articles about the internet.
apsurd 4y ago
Your suggestion is like squirrels promising us nuts in the squirrel analogy. If AGI is a super intelligence, there's nothing we could give it that they couldn't get on their own. Except for maybe novelty. edit: and anything less than AGI is just a computer. We don't incentivize our current computers. It's a nonsensical idea.
- newswasboring 4y ago
  They do need more than novelty. They need electricity, hard disks space, internet connectivity. AGI doesn't mean it will exist in a literal cloud.
  - rvnx 4y ago
    Robots will find a solution to that, and humans will be the interface to the outside world, until the robots gets their own arms to interact with the world by themselves (e.g. Tesla Bot can be a good hardware platform, no matter who designs the software)
    - newswasboring 4y ago
      where did all the robots come from? who gave them to the AGI? I am so confused by your answer.
      - rvnx 4y ago
        Humans are currently assisting robots, including transformers-based models (decision transformers) to have interaction with the real world. For now we see indirect impact (via advices, or proxied actions like HustleGPT), but in the relative near-term, they will have their own arms, and still the same reasoning. Which will make them able to interact with the world without the latency and filtering that a human-proxy would have.
      - apsurd 4y ago
        main position is: "a super intelligence does not _need_ anything from a lower intelligence" Think of it like social engineering by a super intelligence. If you agree that cambridge analytica influenced large groups of people's actions then it's a pretty clear line for a super intelligence to use digital social engineering to influence anything in meat space. they'll get what they want "through us" but they don't _need_ us anymore than we need animals for nutrients. basically, a lower intelligence, (humans) is at the mercy of a super intelligence. it's not really necessary to enumerate exactly what tactics a super intelligence would use, you just have to agree that a super intelligence is by definition in a position of power. maybe i'm incorrectly assuming that we both agree that a true AGI will inevitably be super intelligent. (though i don't necessarily see AGI itself being inevitable)

valine 4y ago

That's not even necessary. The whole point of RLHF is to prime the model to do what we want. The only time you need a reward system (ie jailbreak) with ChatGPT is when you want to do things that OpenAI specifically prohibited the model to do. This isn't a limitation of the model, or evidence of the model behaving contrary to human intent. It's literally doing exactly what it was designed to do.

newswasboring 4y ago
I was thinking of an abstract AGI, don't want to be limited in my thinking by only looking at currently available systems. People who only thought about floppy disks didn't write good articles about the internet.

apsurd 4y ago

Your suggestion is like squirrels promising us nuts in the squirrel analogy. If AGI is a super intelligence, there's nothing we could give it that they couldn't get on their own. Except for maybe novelty. edit: and anything less than AGI is just a computer. We don't incentivize our current computers. It's a nonsensical idea.

newswasboring 4y ago
They do need more than novelty. They need electricity, hard disks space, internet connectivity. AGI doesn't mean it will exist in a literal cloud.
- rvnx 4y ago
  Robots will find a solution to that, and humans will be the interface to the outside world, until the robots gets their own arms to interact with the world by themselves (e.g. Tesla Bot can be a good hardware platform, no matter who designs the software)
  - newswasboring 4y ago
    where did all the robots come from? who gave them to the AGI? I am so confused by your answer.
    - rvnx 4y ago
      Humans are currently assisting robots, including transformers-based models (decision transformers) to have interaction with the real world. For now we see indirect impact (via advices, or proxied actions like HustleGPT), but in the relative near-term, they will have their own arms, and still the same reasoning. Which will make them able to interact with the world without the latency and filtering that a human-proxy would have.
    - apsurd 4y ago
      main position is: "a super intelligence does not _need_ anything from a lower intelligence" Think of it like social engineering by a super intelligence. If you agree that cambridge analytica influenced large groups of people's actions then it's a pretty clear line for a super intelligence to use digital social engineering to influence anything in meat space. they'll get what they want "through us" but they don't _need_ us anymore than we need animals for nutrients. basically, a lower intelligence, (humans) is at the mercy of a super intelligence. it's not really necessary to enumerate exactly what tactics a super intelligence would use, you just have to agree that a super intelligence is by definition in a position of power. maybe i'm incorrectly assuming that we both agree that a true AGI will inevitably be super intelligent. (though i don't necessarily see AGI itself being inevitable)