= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
JGWeissman comments on Ethical Treatment of AI - 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 (15)
One approach to treating an AI ethically is to design it to not be a person. Of course, this means building it the hard way, but, as Tetronian notes, that is already a requirement of making it Friendly.
What are the boundaries of not being a person?
I'm inclined to think that any computer complex enough to be useful will at least have to have a model of itself and a model of what changes to the self (or possibly to the model of itself, which gets to be an interesting distinction) are acceptable. This is at least something like being a person, though presumably it wouldn't need to be able to experience pain.
I'm not going to exclude the possibility of something like pain, though, either -- it might be the most efficient way of modeling "don't do that".
Huh-- this makes p-zombies interesting. Could an AI need qualia?
Eliezer has anticipated your argument:
I think it's relevant that the self-model for an AI would change as the AI changes.