= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
jimrandomh comments on Friendly AI ideas needed: how would you ban porn? - 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 (80)
The distinction between eroticism and pornography is that it's porn of a typical viewer wanks to it. Like the question of whether something is art, the property is not intrinsic to the thing itself.
That this question was so easy, very slightly decreases my difficulty estimate for Friendliness.
So if you only show your porn somewhere that makes it inconvenient to masturbate to (such as at the Met) then it's no longer porn? ;)
Yes.
In the same sense that a broken toilet in an art gallery is a powerful dadaist work of art, but a broken toilet in an alley is a broken toilet.
If I port this type of idea over to AI, I would get things like "the definition of human pain is whether the typical sufferer desires to scream or not". Those definition can be massively gamed, of course; but it does hint that if we define a critical mass of concepts correctly (typical, desires...) we can ground some undefined concepts in those ones. It probably falls apart the more we move away from standard human society (eg will you definition of porn work for tenth generation uploads?).
So in total, if we manage to keep human society relatively static, and we have defined a whole host of concepts, we may be able to ground extra ambiguous concepts using what we've already defined. The challenge seems keeping human society (and humans!) relatively static.