blogospheroid comments on Advice for AI makers - Less Wrong

7 Post author: Stuart_Armstrong 14 January 2010 11:32AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (196)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: blogospheroid 16 January 2010 10:01:15AM 1 point [-]

My point with the virtual worlds was to put the AI into a simulation sufficiently unlike our world that it wouldn't be a threat and sufficiently like our world that we would be able to recognise what it does as intelligence. Hence the Gas giant example.

If we were to release an AI into today's simulations like sims which are much less granular than the one I have proposed in my post, then it would figure out that it is in a simulation much faster.

If we put it into some other kind of universe with weird physics, a magical universe lets say, then we will need to send someone intelligent to do a considerable amount of trials before we release the AI. This is to prove that whatever solutions the AI comes up with are genuinely intelligent and not something that is obvious.

I too agree that we wouldn't want to bet our existence on it being unable to get out of that box, but what evidence will we leave in the simulation which will point to it that it has to "Press Red for talking to simulator"? Or to put it in even simpler terms, where in our universe is OUR "Press Red to talk to simulator" button?

Comment author: Normal_Anomaly 27 June 2011 05:30:51PM 0 points [-]

My point with the virtual worlds was to put the AI into a simulation sufficiently unlike our world that it wouldn't be a threat and sufficiently like our world that we would be able to recognise what it does as intelligence. Hence the Gas giant example.

I'm not sure I follow. Gas giants run on the same physics as you and me. Do you mean a world with actual different simulated physics?

Comment author: wedrifid 16 January 2010 01:41:08PM 0 points [-]

I too agree that we wouldn't want to bet our existence on it being unable to get out of that box, but what evidence will we leave in the simulation which will point to it that it has to "Press Red for talking to simulator"?

I don't know. Who is going to be creating the simulation? How can I be comfortable that he will not either make a bug or design a simulation that a superintelligence cannot deduce that it is artificial? Proving that things way way smarter than me couldn't know stuff is hard. Possible sometimes but hard.

Or to put it in even simpler terms, where in our universe is OUR "Press Red to talk to simulator" button?

The presence or absence of such a button in our universe provides some evidence about whether we could reliably create a simulation that is undetectable. But not that much evidence.

Comment author: ChristianKl 16 January 2010 06:43:38PM 2 points [-]

How would you design such a button? Reciting a fixed verse and afterwards stating what you want from the simulator seems like a good technique. A majority of the people on this earth believe that such a button exists in form of praying ;)