Until you specify the format of a description of the problem, and how the program figures out how to write a program to solve the problem, it is hard to tell if this would be safe.
And if you don't know that it is safe, it isn't. Using some barrier like "fixed computational resources" to contain a non-understood process is a red flag.
The format of the description is something I'm struggling with, but I'm not clear how it impacts safety.
How the AI figures things out is up to the human programmer. Part of my intent in this exercise is to constrain the human to solutions they fully understand. In my mind my original description would have ruled out evolving neural nets, but now I see I definitely didn't make that clear.
By 'fixed computational resources' I mean that you've got to write the program such that if it discovers some flaw that gives it access to the internet, it will patch aroun...
A friend of mine is about to launch himself heavily into the realm of AI programming. The details of his approach aren't important; probabilities dictate that he is unlikely to score a major success. He's asked me for advice, however, on how to design a safe(r) AI. I've been pointing him in the right directions and sending him links to useful posts on this blog and the SIAI.
Do people here have any recommendations they'd like me to pass on? Hopefully, these may form the basis of a condensed 'warning pack' for other AI makers.
Addendum: Advice along the lines of "don't do it" is vital and good, but unlikely to be followed. Coding will nearly certainly happen; is there any way of making it less genocidally risky?