Imagine a hypothetical conversation between an intelligent, rational, epistemically confident AI doomer (say Eliezer Yudkowsky) and a superintelligent AI. The goal of the superintelligence is to genuinely convince the doomer that doom is unlikely or impossible, using only persuasion - no rearranging mind states using nanobots or similar tricks, and...
My note: This essay was written for people worried about nuclear weapons during the Cold War. Although I do not agree with the supernaturalism towards the end, I find the first three paragraphs in particular to be incredibly prescient and helpful for many people worried about AI today. In one...
Imagine a hypothetical conversation between an intelligent, rational, epistemically confident AI doomer (say Eliezer Yudkowsky) and a superintelligent AI. The goal of the superintelligence is to genuinely convince the doomer that doom is unlikely or impossible, using only persuasion - no rearranging mind states using nanobots or similar tricks, and no bribes or blackmail to force a concession. The key question is thus: can a superintelligence convince Yudkowsky that AI doom is unlikely?
While this sounds like a purely impractical philosophical question, it seems to me to have more profound implications. If the superintelligence can rationally convince the doomer that doom is unlikely, then doom is probably rationally unlikely. If the superintelligence cannot... (read more)
Good point. I've edited my note at the beginning accordingly.
My note: This essay was written for people worried about nuclear weapons during the Cold War. Although I do not agree with the supernaturalism towards the end, I find the first three paragraphs in particular to be incredibly prescient and helpful for many people worried about AI today.
In one way we think a great deal too much of the atomic bomb. “How are we to live in an atomic age?” I am tempted to reply: “Why, as you would have lived in the sixteenth century when the plague visited London almost every year, or as you would have lived in a Viking age when raiders from Scandinavia might land and cut your... (read 2396 more words →)
I wouldn't consider AI art to be an "AI harm" - I think it's a tremendous net benefit for artists, just like the digital camera or Photoshop.