You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

gjm comments on I attempted the AI Box Experiment (and lost) - Less Wrong Discussion

47 Post author: Tuxedage 21 January 2013 02:59AM

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

Comments (244)

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

Comment author: gjm 22 January 2013 01:45:58PM 6 points [-]

Higher-stakes games are hard enough already

Doesn't this suggest a serious discrepancy between the AI-box game and any possible future AI-box reality? After all, the stakes for the latter would be pretty damn high.

Comment author: CarlShulman 22 January 2013 08:19:39PM 5 points [-]

Yes. Although that's something of a two-edged sword: in addition to real disincentives to release an AI that was not supposed to be, positive incentives would also be real.

Also it should be noted that I continue to be supportive of the idea of boxing/capacity controls of some kinds for autonomous AGI (they would work better with only modestly superintelligent systems, but seem cheap and potentially helpful for an even wider range), as does most everyone I have talked to about it at SI and FHI. The boxing game is fun, and provides a bit of evidence, but it doesn't indicate that "boxing," especially understood broadly, is useless.