Probably the latter, since they both lost at least once. A real AI trying to get out would devote all its energies to counterfeiting friendliness and probably succeeding.
Boxing is non-viable only in the same sense that locks, passwords, treaties, contracts, testing, peer review, seatbelts, and all other imperfect precautions are non-viable.
Pile on enough of them, in combination, and perhaps they will buy a few years or seconds in which to react. All things equal, is there any reason why an AI of unknown friendliness is any safer without being boxed?
A flawed containment method is still better at containing than no containment method (if implemented with awareness of its flaws) but apparently a flawed friendly AI will miss a very small target in goalspace and for practical purposes be unfriendly. So, if we spent 5 minutes considering the alternatives, would we continue to believe that better boxes are a less tractable problem than friendly AI?
Not that particular AI. But if you think yours is Friendly and others under development have a sufficient probability of being UnFriendly, then trivially, letting it run (in both senses) beats boxing. Oh, and people will die ‘naturally’ while you dither. I hope that thinking this much about making an AI Friendly will prepare someone to get the job done ASAP once the AGI part seems more feasible.
Probably the latter, since they both lost at least once. A real AI trying to get out would devote all its energies to counterfeiting friendliness and probably succeeding.
Boxing is non-viable only in the same sense that locks, passwords, treaties, contracts, testing, peer review, seatbelts, and all other imperfect precautions are non-viable.
Pile on enough of them, in combination, and perhaps they will buy a few years or seconds in which to react. All things equal, is there any reason why an AI of unknown friendliness is any safer without being boxed?
A flawed containment method is still better at containing than no containment method (if implemented with awareness of its flaws) but apparently a flawed friendly AI will miss a very small target in goalspace and for practical purposes be unfriendly. So, if we spent 5 minutes considering the alternatives, would we continue to believe that better boxes are a less tractable problem than friendly AI?
Not that particular AI. But if you think yours is Friendly and others under development have a sufficient probability of being UnFriendly, then trivially, letting it run (in both senses) beats boxing. Oh, and people will die ‘naturally’ while you dither. I hope that thinking this much about making an AI Friendly will prepare someone to get the job done ASAP once the AGI part seems more feasible.