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.

shminux comments on Futarchy and Unfriendly AI - Less Wrong Discussion

9 Post author: jkaufman 03 April 2015 09:45PM

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

Comments (27)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: shminux 03 April 2015 10:18:45PM 4 points [-]

Can you suggest a scenario in which futarchy would result in a clear negative outcome, something analogous to turning the universe into paper clips?

Comment author: jkaufman 06 April 2015 12:47:22PM 2 points [-]

Analogous to turning the universe into paper clips

That's a low bar: it's an intentionally silly example. No one actually thinks we're likely to accidentally create a paperclip maximizer AI anymore than we're likely to accidentally include a "number of paperclips in the world" term in a futarchy metric. But something as clearly negative would be mandatory wireheading to maximize a "human pleasure" term.

A less extreme (and less clearly negative, but also more likely) example would be maximizing GDP. Hanson often uses GDP as an example of something you could include in a futarchy metric. GDP only counts market work, however, which means you can increase GDP by moving tasks from "do them yourself" to "hire someone". For example, if I watch my kid that doesn't count towards GDP, but if I pay you to watch them, and you pay me to do whatever you would otherwise have done during that time, it does.

GDP/person is one of the best metrics for "how is a country doing", often doing much better than explicit attempts to measure things closer to what we care about, but put a big optimizing push behind it and soon all the tiny tasks we do over the course of the day are pressured into market work.