= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Luke_A_Somers comments on Humans get different counterfactuals - 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 (2)
I am not at all sure why the humans wouldn't just turn the AI on again anyway if it were only 99% probable.
Anyway, this reminds me of an oracle system I devised for a fantasy story I never got around to writing - The oracle doesn't always respond, and if they do respond, they tell you what would have happened if they hadn't responded. One of the rules I quickly had to make for the Oracle was that if they didn't say anything, you didn't get to ask again.
I thought (at the time, some time ago) that the Oracle, seeking to be most helpful, would soon converge on answering only around 2/3 - 4/5 of the time so that people wouldn't go and do stupid things in response to the extreme upset of not getting an answer.
That's a human institution problem, that seems more solvable (at least, we shouldn't run the AI if it isn't solved).