= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
CarlShulman comments on The Urgent Meta-Ethics of Friendly Artificial Intelligence - 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 (249)
I like this post but I'd like a better idea of how it's meant to be taken to the concrete level.
Should SIAI try to hire or ask for contributions from the better academic philosophers? (SIAI honchos could do that.)
Should there be a concerted effort to motivate more research in "applied" meta-ethics, the kind that talks to neuroscience and linguistics and computer science? (Philosophers and philosophy students anywhere could do that.)
Should we LessWrong readers, and current or potential SIAI workers, educate ourselves about mainstream meta-ethics, so that we know more about it than just the Yudkowsky version, and be able to pick up on errors? (Anyone reading this site can do that.)
Note that the Future of Humanity Institute is currently hiring postdocs, either with backgrounds in philosophy or alternatively in math/cognitive science/computer science. There is close collaboration between FHI and SIAI, and the FHI is part of Oxford University, which is a bit less of a leap for a philosophy graduate student.