= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Till_Noonsome comments on The AI design space near the FAI [draft] - 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 (48)
I've been avoiding helping SingInst and feel guilty when I do help them because of a form of this argument. The apparent premature emphasis on CEV, Eliezer's spotty epistemology and ideology (or incredibly deep ploys to make people think he has spotty epistemology and ideology), their firing Steve Rayhawk (who had an extremely low salary) while paying Eliezer about a hundred grand a year, &c., are disturbing enough that I fear that supporting them might be the sort of thing that is obviously stupid in retrospect. They have good intentions, but sometimes good intentions aren't enough, sometimes you have to be sane. Thus I'm refraining from supporting or condemning them until I have a much better assessment of the situation. I have a similarly tentative attitude toward Leverage Research.
Obviously this emphasis on CEV is absurd, but I don't know what the alternatives are. Do you? And what are they? And can thinking about CEV be used to generate better alternatives?
I'm a fan of the "just solve decision theory and the rest will follow" approach. Some hybrid of "just solve decision theory" and the philosophical intuitions behind CFAI might also do it and might be less likely to spark AGI by accident. And there's technically the oracle AI option, but I don't like that one.
Maybe, but it seems to me that the opportunity cost is high. CEV wastes people's time on "extrapolation algorithms" and thinking about whether preferences sufficiently converge and other problems that generally aren't on the correct meta level. It also makes people think that AGI requires an ethical solution rather than a make-sure-you-solve-everything-ever-because-this-is-your-only-chance-bucko solution to all philosophy ever.