endoself comments on Reduced impact AI: no back channels - Less Wrong

13 Post author: Stuart_Armstrong 11 November 2013 02:55PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (41)
Tags: mathematics safety prediction reduced_impact ai algorithm risk

Comments (41)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: endoself 18 November 2013 04:07:09AM 0 points [-]

even if P is omniscient, P' still has to estimate it's expected output from its own limited perspective. As long as this estimate is reasonable, the omniscience of P doesn't cause a problem (and remember that P is fed noisy data).

Don't you have to get the exact level of noise that will prevent the AI from hiding from P without letting P reconstruct the AI's actions if it does allow itself to be destroyed? An error in either direction can be catastrophic. If the noise is to high, the AI takes over the world. If the noise is to low, E'(P(Sᵃ|X,Oᵃ,B)/P(Sᵃ|¬X,Õᵃ,B) | a) is going to be very far from 1 no matter what, so there is no reason to expect that optimizing it is still equivalent to reducing impact.

Comment author: Stuart_Armstrong 18 November 2013 12:52:50PM 0 points [-]

Don't you have to get the exact level of noise that will prevent the AI from hiding from P without letting P reconstruct the AI's actions if it does allow itself to be destroyed?

It's not so sensitive. The AI's actions in the box are very hard to detect from the perspective of fifty years, with minimal noise. The AI expanding dangerously across the universe would be easy to detect, even with a lot of noise (if nothing else, because humans would have recorded this and broadcast messages about it).

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit