XerxesPraelor
XerxesPraelor has not written any posts yet.

XerxesPraelor has not written any posts yet.

namely the cases where the AI is trying really hard to be friendly, but doing it in a way that we did not intend.
If the AI knows what friendly is or what mean means, than your conclusion is trivially true. The problem is programming those in - that's what FAI is all about.
Can someone who down voted explain what I got wrong? (note: the capitalization was edited in at the time of this post.)
(and why the reply got so up voted, when a paragraph would have sufficed (or saying "my argument needs multiple paragraphs to be shown, so a paragraph isn't enough"))
It's kind of discouraging when I try to contribute for the first time in a while, and get talked down to and completely dismissed like an idiot without even a rebuttal.
You could at least point to the particular paragraphs which address my points - that shouldn't be too hard.
... (read 455 more words →)So, this is supposed to be what goes through the mind of the AGI. First it thinks “Human happiness is seeing lots of smiling faces, so I must rebuild the entire universe to put a smiley shape into every molecule.” But before it can go ahead with this plan, the checking code kicks in: “Wait! I am supposed to check with the programmers first to see if this is what they meant by human happiness.” The programmers, of course, give a negative response, and the AGI thinks “Oh dear, they didn’t like that idea. I guess I had better not do it then."
But now Yudkowsky is suggesting that the AGI has second
Try this experiment on a religious friend: Tell him you think you might believe in God. Then ask him to list the qualities that define God.
Before reading on, I thought "Creator of everything, understands everything, is in perfect harmony with morality, has revealed himself to the Jews and as Jesus, is triune."
People seldom start religions by saying they're God. They say they're God's messenger, or maybe God's son. But not God. Then God would be this guy you saw stub his toe, and he'd end up like that guy in "The Man Who Would Be King."
That's what's so special about Christianity - Jesus is God, not just his messenger or Son. The... (read more)
There is one very valid test by which we may separate genuine, if perverse and unbalanced, originality and revolt from mere impudent innovation and bluff. The man who really thinks he has an idea will always try to explain that idea. The charlatan who has no idea will always confine himself to explaining that it is much too subtle to be explained. The first idea may be really outree or specialist; it may be really difficult to express to ordinary people. But because the man is trying to express it, it is most probable that there is something in it, after all. The honest man is he who is always trying to utter the unutterable, to describe the indescribable; but the quack lives not by plunging into mystery, but by refusing to come out of it.
G K Chesterton
The content of your post was pretty good from my limited perspective, but this tone is not warranted.