Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.
Might be a nice story to point out to people who think "friendly" is easy.
An aspired rationalist ought to be less gullible and able to spot a hoax like that. Did you feel any sense of confusion when reading it and looking at the picture?
Since it's not made obvious in the title or body of the post, maybe this comment would benefit from rot13? Just a suggestion.
What would the the reason for obfuscating?
I read your comment before I clicked on the link, so I didn't get the chance to spot the hoax for myself.
Ah, makes sense. Thanks.
What about actually applying rot13? Here, this is what you need to copy-paste:
Na nfcvevat engvbanyvfg bhtug gb or yrff thyyvoyr naq noyr gb fcbg n ubnk yvxr gung. Qvq lbh srry nal frafr bs pbashfvba jura ernqvat vg naq ybbxvat ng gur cvpgher?
I know how to use rot13. I will consider obfuscation the next time an issue like this arises.
I know that you know, but trivial obstacles and all that...
Changing your comment now could be a service for a few dozens of people who will see this article in the proximate future.
I missed the shot, for example.
I first read that article a while ago, and was taken in until I read some other articles on the site. It does sound plausible to me that such a robot might be built someday and go wrong in a similar fashion.
I'm neither upvoting nor downvoting the OP because I think the article is interesting a) as a test of rationality/skepticism, and b) as a simple expression of Friendly AI concepts that are worth discussing, as a thought experiment at least.
Maybe it was based on Hugbot.
All it takes is a username and password
Already have an account and just want to login?
Forgot your password?