= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
gjm comments on Tackling the subagent problem: preliminary analysis - 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 (16)
There are already hacking games of this sort (the usual term is "CTF", for "capture the flag") but they don't capture any of what's alleged to be different about AI safety compared with computer security more generally.
True. I suspect gamification of AI safety research might be fun but is unlikely to be actually useful.
I think that in absence of actual AI using humans is the best approximation you can get. And games with in-game reward seems to work well as a motivator. Men die for points.
But yes, to put this to real use (but we may need all we can get) may require some more work.
Humanity has been practicing trying to control and restrain humans (and vice versa, humans were practicing trying to escape and subvert control) for thousands of years.
Real life provides better motivation. No save points, y'know :-/
Only that real-life is not structured in a way to make AI safety research natural for humans...