MichaelVassar comments on Only humans can have human values - Less Wrong

34 Post author: PhilGoetz 26 April 2010 06:57PM

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

Comments (159)

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

Comment author: PhilGoetz 26 April 2010 10:00:49PM 0 points [-]

Maybe sometime I'll write a post on why I think the paperclipper is a strawman. The paperclipper can't compete; it can happen only if a singleton goes bad.

The value systems we revile yet can't prove wrong (paperclipping and wireheading) are both evolutionary dead-ends. This suggests that blind evolution still implements our values better than our reason does; and allowing evolution to proceed is still better than computing a plan of action with our present level of understanding.

Besides, Clippy, a paperclip is just a staple that can't commit.

Comment author: MichaelVassar 27 April 2010 05:01:20AM 8 points [-]

This is extremely confused. Wireheading is an evolutionary dead-end because wireheads ignore their surroundings. Paperclippers, and for that matter, staplers and FAIs pay exclusive attention to their surroundings and ignore their terminal utility functions except to protect them physically. It's just that after acquiring all the resources available, clippy makes clips and Friendly makes things that humans would want if they thought more clearly, such as the experience of less clear thinking humans eating ice cream.