= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Dmytry comments on Yet another safe oracle AI proposal - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (33)
I still don't understand your comment. Are you saying that the Oracle AI concept in general shouldn't be thought of as AI? Or is it something with this particular proposal?
If the end result is a program that can output the source code of a Friendly AI (or solve other problems that we can't currently write a program to solve), then what does it matter whether it's an "AI" or an "agent" or not by some philosophical definition? (Similarly, if a program ends up forcibly rewriting the biosphere in order to count paperclips, it's a moot point to argue over whether it counts as "intelligent" or not.)
Because it is safe to ask a non-agent Oracle questions which do not have dangerous answers (or create dangerous information while calculating the answer). On the other hand, an Oracle that behaves as an agent is unsafe to ask any question because it might convert the planet to computronium to calculate the answer.
OK, so you're using "behaves as an agent" to mean what I mean by "cares about our universe". It doesn't sound like we disagree on substance (i.e. what such a program would do if it worked as proposed).