= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Tetronian comments on An Xtranormal Intelligence Explosion - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (80)
Would it? Though we do contribute to entropy, things like, say, stars do so at a much faster pace. Admittedly this is logically distinct from the AI's decision to destroy humanity, but I don't see why it would immediately jump to the conclusion that we should be wiped out when the main sources of entropy are elsewhere.
More to the point, not all unFriendly AIs would necessarily care about entropy.
It's kind of a moot question though since shutting off the sun would also be a very effective means of killing people.
For almost any objective an AI had, it could better accomplish it the more free energy the AI had. The AI would likely go after entropy losses from both stars and people. The AI couldn't afford to wait to kill people until after it had dealt with nearby stars because by then humans would have likely created another AI god.
Assuming that by "AI" you mean something that maximizes a utility function, as opposed to a dumb apocalypse like a grey-goo or energy virus scenario.
I can see how a “dumb apocalypse like a grey-goo or energy virus” would be Artificial, but why would you call it Inteligent?
On this site, unless otherwise specified, AI usually means “at least as smart as a very smart human”.
Yeah, that makes sense. I was going to suggest "smart enough to kill us", but that's a pretty low bar.