I agree in general, but there’s a lot more things than just AI safety that ought to be worked on more (ie. research on neglected diseases), and today’s AI safety research might reach diminishing returns quickly because we are likely some time away from reaching human level AI. There’s a funding level for AI safety research where I’d want to think about whether it was too much. I don’t think we’ve reached that point quite yet, but it’s probably worth keeping track of the marginal impact of new AI research dollars/researchers to see if it falls off.
Should the violin players at Titanic have stopped playing the violin and tried to save more lives?
What if they could have saved thousands of Titanics each? What if there already was such a technology that could play a deep sad violin song on the background, and project holograms of violin players playing in deep sorrow as the ship sank.
At some point, it becomes obvious that doing the consequentialist thing is the right thing to do. The question is whether the reader believes 2015 humanity has already reached that point or not.
We already produce beauty, art, truth, humor, narratives and knowledge at a much faster pace than we can consume. The ethical grounds on which to act in any non-consequentialist ways have lost much of their strenght.
Do you agree with Bostrom that humanity should defer non-urgent scientific questions, and work on time-sensitive issues such as AI safety?
I agree in general, but there’s a lot more things than just AI safety that ought to be worked on more (ie. research on neglected diseases), and today’s AI safety research might reach diminishing returns quickly because we are likely some time away from reaching human level AI. There’s a funding level for AI safety research where I’d want to think about whether it was too much. I don’t think we’ve reached that point quite yet, but it’s probably worth keeping track of the marginal impact of new AI research dollars/researchers to see if it falls off.
Should the violin players at Titanic have stopped playing the violin and tried to save more lives?
What if they could have saved thousands of Titanics each? What if there already was such a technology that could play a deep sad violin song on the background, and project holograms of violin players playing in deep sorrow as the ship sank.
At some point, it becomes obvious that doing the consequentialist thing is the right thing to do. The question is whether the reader believes 2015 humanity has already reached that point or not.
We already produce beauty, art, truth, humor, narratives and knowledge at a much faster pace than we can consume. The ethical grounds on which to act in any non-consequentialist ways have lost much of their strenght.