= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
TheOtherDave comments on Nonperson Predicates - 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 (162)
Because for the AI to figure out this problem without creating new people within itself, it has to understand consciousness without ever simulating anything conscious.
I am struggling to understand how something can be a friendly AI in the first place without being able to distinguish people from non-people.
The boundaries between present-day people and non-people can be sharper, by a fiat of many intervening class members being nonexistent, than the ideal categories. In other words, except for chimpanzees, cryonics patients, Terry Schiavo, and babies who are exactly 1 year and 2 months and 5 days old, there isn't much that's ambiguous between person and non-person.
More to the point, a CEV-based AI has a potentially different definition of 'sentient being' and 'the class I am to extrapolate'. Theoretically you could be given the latter definition by pointing and not worry too much about boundary cases, and let it work out the former class by itself - if you were sure that the FAI would arrive at the correct answer without creating any sentients along the way!
Fair point.
Mm. Theoretically, yes, I suppose someone could point to every person, and I could be constructed so as to not generalize the extrapolated class beyond the particular targets I've been given.
I'm not sure I would endorse that, but I think that gets us into questions of what the extrapolated class ought to comprise in the first place, which is a much larger and mostly tangential discussion.
So, fair enough... point taken.
Slightly offtopic, but doesn't that assume personhood is binary? I've always assumed it was a sliding scale (I care far less about a dog compared to a human, but I care even less about a fly getting it's wings pulled off. And even then, I care more than about a miniature clockwork fly.)