= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
aleksiL comments on Intelligence explosion in organizations, or why I'm not worried about the singularity - 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)
Comments (187)
Do humans have goals in this sense? Our subsystems seem to conflict often enough.
We have goals, but they are not consistent over time. The worries about artificial agents(with more power) is that, these values if bad implemented, would create losses we could not accept, like extinction.
In this case it doesn't seem like much of a conflict. I think that barring more-or-less obvious signs of disarray we can count on organizations trying to serve their leaders' self-perceived interests - which, while evil, entail not killing humanity - unless and until the singularity changes the game.
James Q. Wilson wrote a book explaining why this often isn't so.
You might also consider looking a Essence of Decision, which analyzes problems JFK had trying to control various government organizations during the Cuban Missile Crisis. If you want to say that the relevant leaders were the heads of those organizations (eg. the Secretaries of State and Defense), you need to articulate a non-circular theory to identify who the leader of an organization is.
The frak? If an organization like America contains multiple parties explicitly and publicly promising to defeat each other - eg, because people in the other one secretly serve a hostile organization - that falls under "more-or-less obvious signs of disarray".
Can you play that out a little? I think what I'm trying to assert and what you are interpreting aren't the same thing.
My intended assertion was that the sentence:
is false. Further, analyzing that fact in terms of "goals" of the State Department and the Department of Defense leads to insightful and useful conclusions about how organizations work.