If Albert only wants to be friendly, then other indivudals friendliness is orthogonal to that. Does being on the agenda of frinedliness in general (not just personal friendliness) imply being the dominant intelligence?
I think Albert ought to give to give a powerpoint on most effective (economical) warfare on the japanese company. Althought it does sound an awfully lot like how to justify hostility in the name of friendliness.
Then that’s not what you described. You think the coherent extrapolated volition of humanity, or at least the people Albert interacts with is that they want to be deceived?
It is plausible that the AI thinks that the extrapolated volition of his programmers, the choice they’d make in retrospect if they were wiser and braver, might be to be deceived in this particular instance, for their own good.
And it knows this.. how? A friendly engineered intelligence doesn’t trust its CEV model beyond the domain over which it was constructed. Don’t anthropomorphize its thinking processes. It knows the map is not the territory, and is not subject to the heuristics and biases which would cause a human to apply a model under novel circumstances without verification..
By modeling them, now and after the consequences. If, after they were aware of the consequences, they regret the decision by a greater margin (adjusted for the probability of the bad outcome) than the margin by which they would decide to not take action now, then they are only deciding wrongly because they are being insufficiently moved by abstract evidence, and it is in their actual rational interest to take action now, even if they don’t realize it.
A friendly engineered intelligence doesn’t trust its CEV model beyond the domain over which it was constructed.
You’re overloading friendly pretty hard. I don’t think that’s a characteristic of most friendly AI designs and don’t see any reason other than idealism to think it is.
If Albert only wants to be friendly, then other indivudals friendliness is orthogonal to that. Does being on the agenda of frinedliness in general (not just personal friendliness) imply being the dominant intelligence?
I think Albert ought to give to give a powerpoint on most effective (economical) warfare on the japanese company. Althought it does sound an awfully lot like how to justify hostility in the name of friendliness.
Assume we’re talking about the Coherent Extrapolated Volition self-modifying general AI version of “friendly”.
Then that’s not what you described. You think the coherent extrapolated volition of humanity, or at least the people Albert interacts with is that they want to be deceived?
It is plausible that the AI thinks that the extrapolated volition of his programmers, the choice they’d make in retrospect if they were wiser and braver, might be to be deceived in this particular instance, for their own good.
And it knows this.. how? A friendly engineered intelligence doesn’t trust its CEV model beyond the domain over which it was constructed. Don’t anthropomorphize its thinking processes. It knows the map is not the territory, and is not subject to the heuristics and biases which would cause a human to apply a model under novel circumstances without verification..
By modeling them, now and after the consequences. If, after they were aware of the consequences, they regret the decision by a greater margin (adjusted for the probability of the bad outcome) than the margin by which they would decide to not take action now, then they are only deciding wrongly because they are being insufficiently moved by abstract evidence, and it is in their actual rational interest to take action now, even if they don’t realize it.
You’re overloading friendly pretty hard. I don’t think that’s a characteristic of most friendly AI designs and don’t see any reason other than idealism to think it is.