4 ms·

To my knowledge they haven't published anything around AI risk or released any statements/positions publicly. That doesn't mean that they aren't taking it seri

by mej10 14y ago

To my knowledge they haven't published anything around AI risk or released any statements/positions publicly. That doesn't mean that they aren't taking it seriously, but it is at least a strong signal to me.

fudged71 14y ago
Best I can find: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/business/july-dec02/google_11-29.html http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/business/july-dec02/google_11... SPENCER MICHELS: Sergay Brin thinks the ultimate search engine would be something like the computer named Hal in the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey. SERGEY BRIN: Hal could... had a lot of information, could piece it together, could rationalize it. Now, hopefully, it would never... it would never have a bug like Hal did where he killed the occupants of the space ship. But that's what we're striving for, and I think we've made it a part of the way there.
- nova 14y ago
  Funny, because Hal didn't had a bug. It did what it did interpreting the orders that humans gave it. Just unintended consequences. Which is kinda the point about AI safety. We don't really know what we want, we sure as hell don't know how to formalize it, and we're lucky that we don't know how to create a real AI because otherwise it could surprise us in a very ugly way, just lawfully following the plan we gave it.
- jamieb 14y ago
  "hopefully" Oh. Not rules then? Well, what rules. How about giving it a rule "children must not die". Apparently we're big on that one. Except, wait, we mean "US children must not die", so we can still bomb foreign suburbs where children are known to exist. But then we'll need "children must not die on US soil" because it is still possible that the union of (isa US minor citizen ?x) and (isa-resident baghdad ?x) is non empty and the AI would be unable to act. Of course then we need, "US children must not die except in a car", because otherwise the AI would have to destroy cars. Ok, so lets abandon rule based AI altogether and model our AI on biological processes like humans. Well humans would never cause mass suffering of other humans. We have laws against it. Oh. "hopefully" "Let's play global thermonuclear war!"
  - fudged71 14y ago
    The only winning move is not to program AI? Here's an interesting discussion about AI, rules, morality, etc. http://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/y9lm0/i_am_luke_muehlhauser_ceo_of_the_singularity/c5tkbry http://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/y9lm0/i_am_luke_...

by mej10 14y ago

fudged71 14y ago

Best I can find: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/business/july-dec02/google_11-29.html http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/business/july-dec02/google_11... SPENCER MICHELS: Sergay Brin thinks the ultimate search engine would be something like the computer named Hal in the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey. SERGEY BRIN: Hal could... had a lot of information, could piece it together, could rationalize it. Now, hopefully, it would never... it would never have a bug like Hal did where he killed the occupants of the space ship. But that's what we're striving for, and I think we've made it a part of the way there.

nova 14y ago
Funny, because Hal didn't had a bug. It did what it did interpreting the orders that humans gave it. Just unintended consequences. Which is kinda the point about AI safety. We don't really know what we want, we sure as hell don't know how to formalize it, and we're lucky that we don't know how to create a real AI because otherwise it could surprise us in a very ugly way, just lawfully following the plan we gave it.
jamieb 14y ago
"hopefully" Oh. Not rules then? Well, what rules. How about giving it a rule "children must not die". Apparently we're big on that one. Except, wait, we mean "US children must not die", so we can still bomb foreign suburbs where children are known to exist. But then we'll need "children must not die on US soil" because it is still possible that the union of (isa US minor citizen ?x) and (isa-resident baghdad ?x) is non empty and the AI would be unable to act. Of course then we need, "US children must not die except in a car", because otherwise the AI would have to destroy cars. Ok, so lets abandon rule based AI altogether and model our AI on biological processes like humans. Well humans would never cause mass suffering of other humans. We have laws against it. Oh. "hopefully" "Let's play global thermonuclear war!"
- fudged71 14y ago
  The only winning move is not to program AI? Here's an interesting discussion about AI, rules, morality, etc. http://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/y9lm0/i_am_luke_muehlhauser_ceo_of_the_singularity/c5tkbry http://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/y9lm0/i_am_luke_...