3 ms·
> "I am at a loss to understand how this agent of doom (the AI not Bostrom) can be both "intelligent" and not understand that there are enough paperclips." Hav
by ThrowawayR2 2y ago
> "I am at a loss to understand how this agent of doom (the AI not Bostrom) can be both "intelligent" and not understand that there are enough paperclips."
Having offspring might be ill-advised for a variety of reasons (medical, financial, etc.) but that doesn't stop humans from being horny and producing offspring. If powerful drives can be encoded in to a sapient organism well below the level of conscious thought, perhaps similar drives can be present in an artificial sapient being.
- _wire_ 2y ago> If powerful drives can be encoded in to a sapient organism The article says nothing about this. Is anyone demonstrating sentient synthetic life? This idea has nothing to do with the technology at hand. But my point is definitional regarding the word "intelligence". I'd accept a counter argument that humanity is already wrecking global ecosystems by making too many "paperclips," and given that the only measure we have for AI is the imitation game, then doom QED. But this amounts to a diagnosis of physician heal thyself. "Dr. it hurts when I do this!"