chron comments on Heroin model: AI "manipulates" "unmanipulatable" reward - Less Wrong

6 Post author: Stuart_Armstrong 22 September 2016 10:27AM

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

Comments (10)

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

Comment author: chron 22 September 2016 06:57:01PM 2 points [-]

Well in a sense U(++,-) itself contradicts μ. After all in when given heroin the human seeks it out and acquires more utility than not seeking it out, why doesn't the human seek it out volunterily?

Comment author: CronoDAS 22 September 2016 08:09:23PM 2 points [-]

Imagine a drug with no effect except that it cures its own (very bad) withdrawal symptoms. There's no benefit to taking it once, but once you've been exposed, it's beneficial to keep taking more because not taking it makes you feel very bad.

Comment author: chron 23 September 2016 01:15:07AM 1 point [-]

And in that case U(++,-) doesn't imply that forcing people on the drug increases utility.

Comment author: Manfred 23 September 2016 05:40:05AM *  1 point [-]

It implies it only in combination with the false premise that peoples' actions accurately reflect the utility function we want to maximize.