If that’s your hope—then you should already be alarmed at trends
Would be nice for someone to quantify the trends. Otherwise it may as well be that trends point to easygoing enough and aligned enough future systems.
For some humans, the answer will be yes—they really would do zero things!
Nah, it’s impossible for evolution to just randomly stumble upon such complicated and unnatural mind-design. Next you are going to say what, that some people are fine with being controlled?
Where an entity has never had the option to do a thing, we may not validly infer its lack of preference.
Aha, so if we do give the option to an entity and it doesn’t always kills all humans, then we have evidence it cares, right?
If there is a technical refutation it should simplify back into a nontechnical refutation.
Wait, why prohibiting successors would stop OpenAI from declaring easygoing system a failure? Ah, right—because there is no technical analysis, just elements of one.
Would be nice for someone to quantify the trends. Otherwise it may as well be that trends point to easygoing enough and aligned enough future systems.
Nah, it’s impossible for evolution to just randomly stumble upon such complicated and unnatural mind-design. Next you are going to say what, that some people are fine with being controlled?
Aha, so if we do give the option to an entity and it doesn’t always kills all humans, then we have evidence it cares, right?
Wait, why prohibiting successors would stop OpenAI from declaring easygoing system a failure? Ah, right—because there is no technical analysis, just elements of one.