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.

asd comments on Stupid Questions, 2nd half of December - Less Wrong Discussion

2 Post author: Bound_up 23 December 2015 05:31AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (186)

Comments (186)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: [deleted] 24 December 2015 11:55:35PM 1 point [-]

What kind of information it gives to you when you observe that a bunch of filthy rich people were convinced by EY's arguments but MIRI is still badly in need of more funding?

Comment author: ChristianKl 25 December 2015 12:29:35PM 2 points [-]

One of the key elements is that it suggests that MIRI doesn't let donors dictate it's technical agenda. Elon Musk wants to play an active role at OpenAI. He also has an interest that OpenAI produces software that Tesla can use to produce better driverless cars.

Comment author: username2 25 December 2015 02:32:14PM 1 point [-]

I think that it would be great if MIRI had direct competitors. We would be better able to see what is essential to AI ethics and what is a local parochialism.

Comment author: PipFoweraker 26 December 2015 12:01:35AM *  0 points [-]

I am challenged to think of a way that my Newly Minted MIRI Competitor could differentiate itself from MIRI in a way that is both:

a) optimal, and

b) non-divergent from MIRI's goals in such a way as to be functionally different.

I could certainly fund Evilbot Angry AI Development Labs, and we might see a difference in focus away from GAI frameworks and more towards how-to-kill-all-the-humans-as-effectively-as-possible research, but that doesn't let me weed out what 'local parochialism' is.

Comment author: ChristianKl 26 December 2015 09:41:37PM 2 points [-]

FHI is a MIRI competitor. OpenAI is now also a MIRI competitor.

Comment author: PipFoweraker 29 December 2015 11:58:41PM 0 points [-]

I suggest that the more Musk influences OpenAI's agenda, the further it moves away from core competition with MIRI.

A counterexample might be if a series of AI researchers in China announced a formation a clone of MIRI but based out of Shanghai - a more clear-cut intelligence race than what we've currently go, which is an increasing number of institutions all starting down roadmaps that share initial common ground but have divergent ideal end states.

Comment author: username2 26 December 2015 11:12:18AM *  1 point [-]

No one knows what is optimal, if more people attempted to find it, it would increase probability that at least one of them would succeed.

Comment author: WoodSwordSquire 29 December 2015 06:09:59PM 1 point [-]

I tried to brainstorm what they might be thinking.

  • MIRI is making a mistake that means its' work is useless
  • MIRI won't decrease AI risk unless some other intervention is done first (there is a rerequisite)
  • We're doomed, resistance is futile
  • Other people wll fund it if they wait (seems unlikely, if the amount required is trivial to them)
  • They have political/strategic reasons not to be associated with MIRI (if they contribute anonymously, there's still the risk that other donors will disappear and they'll be stuck supporting it indefinitely)
  • They'd rather work on the probem wiht their own organization, because of reasons
Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit