= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
TimS comments on The challenges of bringing up AIs - 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 (27)
What, if anything, do proponents of the raise-AI-as-kids proponents say when someone asserts that we don't have a particularly reliable process for producing Friendly children?
In the defense of the raise-AI-as-kids proponents, ethics committees tend to limit the search for reliable processes for producing Friendly children.
Anyone with an idea and a computer can write an advice book on how to raise children. And Science really doesn't know what techniques have what effects in particular circumstances.
If we really knew how to raise Friendly children, public schools wouldn't be the mess that they are.
None of that has anything to do with IRB or other ethics reviews.
I am not talking about taking N children and getting N children, maximizing average Friendliness of the children. I am talking about, given N children, finding some regimen X, such that a child which has finished regimen X will have the highest expected Friendliness.
Regimen X may well involve frequent metaphorical culling of children who have low expected Friendliness.
It isn't clear that Science knows even a culling regime that would create Friendly child. If there were a reliable culling regime, we'd have Friendly politicians.
Also, what's up with this degree-of-Friendliness language. AGI that has a small degree of Friendly is called uFAI. We're already quite confident that we could make uFAI if we could make AGI at all.
We are bringing up machines in society today. Interactions with society do apparently help them to pick up human values - so cars have air bags, blenders have safety lids, and social networks have privacy awareness.
Attempting to avoid interactions with society means that your machines will be untested, and they will be insulated from economic growth that might fuel their development. So: other things being equal, such approaches are less likely to be safe, and more likely to come last - in which case their safety is irrelevant.