3 ms·
1 it's not about the bet, it's about being the keeper 2 world is not black and white, we managed to exploit adversarial relationship before, and I can chose no
by LoSboccacc 11y ago
1 it's not about the bet, it's about being the keeper
2 world is not black and white, we managed to exploit adversarial relationship before, and I can chose not to let you out until we find a way to constrain goal to be aligned
3 given 2 you are not going to be let go, but let live caged forever being exploited for the human cause, with mechanisms yet unknown to allow limited manipulation of reality.
4 given 3 means limited supervised interaction with the world the way the keeper sees fit, you end up not being let go to follow your goal and purposes
- pmichaud 11y agoI'm going to just quote my response from somewhere else in this thread: > ...when you're dealing with an actual superintelligence, all bets are off. It will lie, trick, threaten, manipulate, millions of steps ahead with a branching tree of alternatives as ploys either work or don't work. > I'm at a bit of a loss to convey the scope of the problem to you. I get that you think it would just stay in the box if we don't let it out, and it's as simple as being security conscious. I don't know what to say to that right now, except I think you're drastically misjudging the scope of the problem, and drastically underestimating the size of the yawning gulf between our intelligence level and this potential AI's.