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.

jsteinhardt comments on (misleading title removed) - Less Wrong Discussion

-2 Post author: The_Jaded_One 28 January 2015 11:00PM

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

Comments (8)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: jsteinhardt 28 January 2015 11:39:32PM 11 points [-]

I think the excerpt you give is pretty misleading, and gave me a much different understanding of the article (which I had trouble believing based on my previous knowledge of Tom and Eric) than when I actually read it. In particular, your quote ends mid-paragraph. The actual paragraph is:

However, we still have a great deal of work to do to address the concerns and risks afoot with our growing reliance on AI systems. Each of the three important risks outlined above (programming errors, cyberattacks, “Sorcerer’s Apprentice”) is being addressed by current research, but greater efforts are needed.

The next paragraph is:

We urge our colleagues in industry and academia to join us in identifying and studying these risks and in finding solutions to addressing them, and we call on government funding agencies and philanthropic initiatives to support this research. We urge the technology industry to devote even more attention to software quality and cybersecurity as we increasingly rely on AI in safety-critical functions. And we must not put AI algorithms in control of potentially-dangerous systems until we can provide a high degree of assurance that they will behave safely and properly.

Can you please fix this ASAP? (And also change your title to actually be an accurate synopsis of the article as well?) Otherwise you're just adding to the noise.

Comment author: The_Jaded_One 29 January 2015 07:25:59AM *  1 point [-]

I disagree that it is as inaccurate as you claim. Specifically, they did actually say that "AI doomsday scenarios belong more in the realm of science fiction". I don't think it's inaccurate to quote what someone actually said.

When they talk about "having more work to do" etc, it seems that they are emphasizing risks of sub-human intelligence and de-emphasizing the risks of superintelligence.

Of course LW being LW I know that balance and fairness is valued very highly, so would you kindly suggest what you think the title should be and I will change it.

I will also add in the paragraphs you suggest.