= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
DanielLC comments on A few thoughts on a Friendly AGI (safe vs friendly, other minds problem, ETs and more) - 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 (44)
You don't need accurate down to the subatomic level. You just need a human. The same human would be nice, since it means the FAI managed to keep all of those people from dying, but unless it's programmed to only value currently alive people, that's not a big deal.
Also, you make it sound like you're saying we won't develop that storage capability until well after we develop the AGI. It's the AGI that will be developing technology. What we can do just before we make it is not a good indicator of what it can do.
Because neural pathways and other structures of the brain are pretty small, I think you'd need an extremely high resolution. However, I guess what you're saying is that a breeding population would be enough to at least keep the species going, so I acknowledge that. Still, I'm hoping we can make something that does something in addition to that.
Your second point depends on how small the AGI can make reliable storage tech I guess.
In the perhaps this whole point is moot because its unlikely an intelligence explosion will take long enough for there to be time for other researchers to construct an alternative AGI.
Their children will be fine. You don't even need a breeding population. You just need to know how to make an egg, a sperm, and an artificial uterus.
It might encounter another AGI as it spreads, although I don't think this point will matter much in the ensuing war (or treaty, if they decide on that).