wedrifid comments on Ethical dilemmas for paperclip maximizers - Less Wrong

11 Post author: CronoDAS 01 August 2011 05:31AM

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

Comments (24)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: wedrifid 01 August 2011 09:41:04AM 2 points [-]

1) Do paperclip maximizers care about paperclip mass, paperclip count, or both?

Given the origin of paperclip maximisers as a metaphor we can expect them to maximise the paperclips based off the template they were constructed with originally. It is possible that even the specification of a paperclip is unstable under recursive improvement but somewhat less likely. Postulating agents that don't even know what a paperclip is seems less useful as a tool for constructing counterfactuals. Agents that are that flexible with respect to what their actual goal is can be used to illustrate different decision theoretic games but there is no need to recycle 'paperclip maximiser' for that purpose.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 02 August 2011 07:14:57AM 0 points [-]

It is possible that even the specification of a paperclip is unstable under recursive improvement but somewhat less likely. Postulating agents that don't even know what a paperclip is seems less useful as a tool for constructing counterfactuals.

It is, however, useful for thinking about recursive stability in general, and thinking about designing agents to have stable goal systems.