Research interests I don't currently have time to develop alone

Stuart_Armstrong

EDIT: added the "rights of parents" and "simulation hypothesis" research interests.

I've started a lot of research projects and have a lot of research interests that I don't currently have time to develop on my own. So I'm putting the research interests together on this page, and anyone can let me know if they're interested in doing any joint projects on these topics. This can range from coauthoring, to simply having a conversation about these and seeing where that goes.

The possible research topics are:

Reduced impact AI (this is one I'm certainly going to be returning to, once I have the time).
The Fermi paradox and universal colonisation.
Anthropic decision theory (extending it to include quantum mechanics).
How to divide the gains from trade/to negotiate/to achieve "fairness"/to avoid blackmail.
Oracle AI and the (non-)differences between tool AIs and agents
General assessments of predictions and experts (including counterfactual resiliency).
The future of surveillance.
The risks of singleton world governments and mass-em worlds.
Anthropic shadows for multiple risks.
The potential limitations of the Turing test as an accurate general intelligence test.
Extending the orthogonality thesis to realistic AI designs.
Infinite ethics.
The cake or death problem for value loading: whether it's fully solved or whether similar problems remain.
The problems with total utilitarianism.
The problems with CEV (and potential solutions).
Whether AIXI would end protecting itself or not.
The rights of parents versus others in determining the genetic modifications of their children (and the efficiency of the markets in these kinds of modifications).
Exploring the consequences of the simulation hypothesis, as Joshua Fox did.

EDIT: added the "rights of parents" and "simulation hypothesis" research interests.

The possible research topics are:

Reduced impact AI (this is one I'm certainly going to be returning to, once I have the time).
The Fermi paradox and universal colonisation.
Anthropic decision theory (extending it to include quantum mechanics).
How to divide the gains from trade/to negotiate/to achieve "fairness"/to avoid blackmail.
Oracle AI and the (non-)differences between tool AIs and agents
General assessments of predictions and experts (including counterfactual resiliency).
The future of surveillance.
The risks of singleton world governments and mass-em worlds.
Anthropic shadows for multiple risks.
The potential limitations of the Turing test as an accurate general intelligence test.
Extending the orthogonality thesis to realistic AI designs.
Infinite ethics.
The cake or death problem for value loading: whether it's fully solved or whether similar problems remain.
The problems with total utilitarianism.
The problems with CEV (and potential solutions).
Whether AIXI would end protecting itself or not.
The rights of parents versus others in determining the genetic modifications of their children (and the efficiency of the markets in these kinds of modifications).
Exploring the consequences of the simulation hypothesis, as Joshua Fox did.

Autonomy is mostly a negative right -- it's a right to be free from interference and coercion.

Freedom is both a negative and a positive right -- it's the lack of restrictions (negative) but it's also the capability to do things (positive).

In that case, anything that a government (or any other external agent) does to decrease someone's freedom also decreases their autonomy, unless you want to redefine "interference" too. If you take away my capability to do things, you are interfering with me. Based on the examples you provided, it sounds to me like the difference between autonomy and freedom is that "autonomy" is an applause light, so limits to freedom that you approve of aren't limits to autonomy, but limits to freedom that you don't approve of are.

Do you think your behavior would change if you knew that every moment of your life was observed and recorded by government agents?

No. All the laws that I regularly break are laws that enough people regularly break that the police would very quickly give up even pretending to enforce them. Things that aren't illegal but I wouldn't want known would rarely end up exposed even if the surveillance system did not have well-designed protections for the surveyed, simply because the government agents involved wouldn't have time to keep track of and exploit everyone's embarrassing secrets.

Or, simpler, have you read 1984?

No, but I know what you are referring to. This is not an inevitable consequence of surveillance.

Selective enforcement of laws can be a huge problem. If for some reason a local cop decides he doesn't like you, having all your crimes recorded in advance will make retaliation much easier.

27

Research interests I don't currently have time to develop alone

27

27

27

Research interests I don't currently have time to develop alone

27

27