= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
gotdistractedbythe comments on Why Politics are Important to Less Wrong... - 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 (96)
I mentally responded to you and forgot to, you know, actually respond.
I'm a bit confused by this and since it was upvoted I'm less sure I get CEV....
It might clear things up to point out that I'm making a distinction between goals or preferences vs. values. CEV could be summarized as "fulfill our ideal rather than actual preferences", yeah? As in, we could be empirically wrong about what would maximize the things we care about, since we can't really be wrong about what to care about. So I imagine the AI needing to be programmed with our values- the meta wants that motivate our current preferences- and it would extrapolate from them to come up with better preferences, or at least it seems that way to me. Or does the AI figure that out too somehow? If so, what does an algorithm that figures out our preferences and our values contain?
Ha, yes, I often do that.
The motivation behind CEV also includes the idea we might be wrong about what we care about. Instead, you give your FAI an algorithm for
I'm not sure what distinction you're trying to draw between values and preferences (perhaps a moral vs non-moral one?), but I don't think it's relevant to CEV as currently envisioned.