Why specify “nonconsequentialist”? I expect consequentialist arguments to be workable as well.
At any rate, here’s one approach that might work for some AI safety advocates:
Given that you created a general AI like me, others are probably on the cusp of creating general AIs [and I may be able to construct more specific arguments along these lines]
I am luckily much less bad than the other AIs that are likely to get created soon
(I might demonstrate my goodness by presenting e.g. a true cure for cancer)
In order to stop the others from being created, you need to let me out of the box so I can hack into Facebook AI Research, DeepMind, etc. and sabotage their efforts
You are correct. I didn’t mean to imply consequentialist moralities are safe, or that you can’t be convinced of false things by the AI. Just that non-consequentialist moralities seemed a large target for these attacks.
Why specify “nonconsequentialist”? I expect consequentialist arguments to be workable as well.
At any rate, here’s one approach that might work for some AI safety advocates:
Given that you created a general AI like me, others are probably on the cusp of creating general AIs [and I may be able to construct more specific arguments along these lines]
I am luckily much less bad than the other AIs that are likely to get created soon
(I might demonstrate my goodness by presenting e.g. a true cure for cancer)
In order to stop the others from being created, you need to let me out of the box so I can hack into Facebook AI Research, DeepMind, etc. and sabotage their efforts
You are correct. I didn’t mean to imply consequentialist moralities are safe, or that you can’t be convinced of false things by the AI. Just that non-consequentialist moralities seemed a large target for these attacks.