paulfchristiano comments on Cryptographic Boxes for Unfriendly AI - Less Wrong

24 Post author: paulfchristiano 18 December 2010 08:28AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (155)
Tags: ai

Comments (155)

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

Comment author: orthonormal 18 December 2010 04:20:30PM 13 points [-]

Let me see if I understand. Firstly, is there any reason what you're trying to do is create a friendly AI? Would, for instance, getting an unknown AI to solve a specific numerical problem with an objectively checkable answer be an equally relevant example, without the distraction of whether we would ever trust the so-called friendly AI?

I think Less Wrong needs a variant of Godwin's Law. Any post whose content would be just as meaningful and accessible without mentioning Friendly AI, shouldn't mention Friendly AI.

Comment author: paulfchristiano 18 December 2010 07:01:00PM 4 points [-]

Fair enough. I am going to rework the post to describe the benefits of a provably secure quarantine in general rather than in this particular example.

The main reason I describe friendliness is that I can't believe that such a quarantine would hold up for long if the boxed AI was doing productive work for society. It would almost certainly get let out without ever saying anything at all. It seems like the only real hope is to use its power to somehow solve FAI before the existence of an uFAI becomes widely known.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit