= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
passive_fist comments on I tried my hardest to win in an AI box experiment, and I failed. Here are the logs. - 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 (28)
I stopped reading after the first few insults about excrement... I'm not sure where you were trying to get with that. If that was part of some strategy I'm not sure how you think that would have worked.
Agree. Hopefully I'm not the only one who thinks that AGI game in this example was quite disappointing. But anyway, I was never convinced that AI boxing is good idea as it would be impossible for any human to correctly analyze the intentions of SI based on this kind of test.
I tried to make him have such an unpleasant time that he would quit before the time is up, so that I would win.
That's not really in the spirit of the experiment. For the AI to win the gatekeeper must explicitly release the AI. If the gatekeeper fails to abide by the rules that merely invalidates the experiment.
Not just that, it's a futile strategy, cause you just encourage them to look away from the monitor and do nothing for 2 hours (which is entirely fair game).
Doing nothing for two hours is hard as heck for typical people. And if I recall correctly, although the rules allow the Gatekeeper to not engage with the AI, they don't allow the Gatekeeper to do something else. What's your prior for the Gatekeeper getting bored of not doing anything and reengaging the AI?
In Tuxedage's rule set, if the gatekeeper leaves before 2 hours, it counts as an AI win. So it's a viable strategy. However ---
I am sure that it would work against some opponents, but my feeling is it would not work against people on Less Wrong. It was a good try though.
The more natural option seems to be to treat that as a draw. The AI's not getting out if you leave the conversation, but there's not much point in going to the trouble of building an AI if you're not going to talk to it.
I was not aware of Tuxedage's ruleset. However any ruleset that allows for the AI to win without being explicitly released by the gatekeeper is problematic.
If asd had won due to the gatekeeper leaving it would only have demonstrated that being unpleasant can cause people to disengage from conversation, which is different from demonstrating that it is possible to convince a person to release a potentially dangerous AI.
I kind of agree upon reflection. Tuxedage's ruleset seems tailored for games where there is money on the line, and in that case it feels very unfair to say GK can leave right away. GK would be heavily incentivized to leave immediately, since that would get GK's charity a guaranteed donation.
I've always thought the gatekeeper should have a 'shutdown' option that results in both the gatekeeper and the AI losing money (but less loss for the gatekeeper than releasing). That should make verbal abuse strategies a good deal harder.