= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
I tried to make him have such an unpleasant time that he would quit before the time is up, so that I would win.
In response to
comment
by
on
I tried my hardest to win in an AI box experiment, and I failed. Here are the logs.
In response to
comment
by
[deleted]
on
I tried my hardest to win in an AI box experiment, and I failed. Here are the logs.
That's not really in the spirit of the experiment. For the AI to win the gatekeeper must explicitly release the AI. If the gatekeeper fails to abide by the rules that merely invalidates the experiment.
In response to
A List of Nuances
Everything is actually about signalling.
Counterclaim: Not everything is actually about signalling.
Almost everything can be pressed into use as a signal in some way. You can conspicuously overpay for things to signal affluence or good taste or whatever. Or you can put excessive amounts of effort into something to signal commitment or the right stuff or whatever. That almost everything can be used as a signal does not mean that almost everything is being used primarily as a signal all of the time.
Signalling only makes sense in a social environment, so things that you would do or benefit from even if you were in a nonsocial environment are good candidates for things that are not primarily about signalling. Things like eating, wearing clothes, sleeping areas, medical attention and learning.
Some of the items from the list of X is not about Y:
"Food isn’t about nutrition. Clothes aren’t about comfort. Bedrooms aren’t about sleep. Laughter isn’t about humour. Charity isn’t about helping. Medicine isn’t about health. Consulting isn’t about advice. School isn’t about learning. Research isn’t about progress. Language isn’t about communication."
All these are primarily about something other than signalling. Yes they can be "about" signalling some of the time to varying degrees but not as their primary purpose. (At least not without becoming dysfunctional.)
View more: Prev
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
In Tuxedage's rule set, if the gatekeeper leaves before 2 hours, it counts as an AI win. So it's a viable strategy. However ---
I am sure that it would work against some opponents, but my feeling is it would not work against people on Less Wrong. It was a good try though.
I was not aware of Tuxedage's ruleset. However any ruleset that allows for the AI to win without being explicitly released by the gatekeeper is problematic.
If asd had won due to the gatekeeper leaving it would only have demonstrated that being unpleasant can cause people to disengage from conversation, which is different from demonstrating that it is possible to convince a person to release a potentially dangerous AI.