I’m not sure I see how any of these are critiques of the specific paperclip-maximizer example of misalignment. Or really, how they contradict ANY misalignment worries.
These are ways that alignment COULD happen, not ways that misalignment WON’T happen or paperclip-style misalignment won’t have bad impact. And they’re thought experiments in themselves, so there’s no actual evidence in either direction about likelihoods.
As arguments about paperclip-maximizer worries, they’re equivalent to “maybe that won’t occur”.
I’m not sure I see how any of these are critiques of the specific paperclip-maximizer example of misalignment. Or really, how they contradict ANY misalignment worries.
These are ways that alignment COULD happen, not ways that misalignment WON’T happen or paperclip-style misalignment won’t have bad impact. And they’re thought experiments in themselves, so there’s no actual evidence in either direction about likelihoods.
As arguments about paperclip-maximizer worries, they’re equivalent to “maybe that won’t occur”.