I think the challenge of communicating with artificial intelligences is not that we don’t have a dedicated Unicode symbol for “benefit humans”, but rather that we can’t define what that means.
Relevant chapter of the Sequences: Truly Part of You, if you replace the capitalized words with emojis.
Thank you for your response. You make a good point: the difficulty in defining what it means to “benefit humans” is indeed a significant challenge. However, this challenge is fundamentally rooted in the limitations of our current language. Our natural languages are inherently ambiguous, shaped by culture, context, and individual experience, which makes it difficult even for humans to agree on a precise definition of “benefit.”
Given this, it’s not surprising that machines struggle to understand such concepts. If we, as humans, cannot clearly and universally define what “benefit humans” means, how can we expect an AI, which relies on the inputs and instructions we provide, to interpret it correctly? This is precisely why I advocate for the development of a new hybrid language for us in day to day life, a language that reduces ambiguity by integrating precise symbols, mathematical expressions, and logic.
This language isn’t about simply adding a Unicode symbol for “benefit humans”; it’s about creating a structured way of communicating that forces us to be clear and unambiguous in our intentions. By doing so, we can better align AI systems with human goals and values, ensuring that their actions reflect what we mean, not just what we say.
I think the challenge of communicating with artificial intelligences is not that we don’t have a dedicated Unicode symbol for “benefit humans”, but rather that we can’t define what that means.
Relevant chapter of the Sequences: Truly Part of You, if you replace the capitalized words with emojis.
Thank you for your response. You make a good point: the difficulty in defining what it means to “benefit humans” is indeed a significant challenge. However, this challenge is fundamentally rooted in the limitations of our current language. Our natural languages are inherently ambiguous, shaped by culture, context, and individual experience, which makes it difficult even for humans to agree on a precise definition of “benefit.”
Given this, it’s not surprising that machines struggle to understand such concepts. If we, as humans, cannot clearly and universally define what “benefit humans” means, how can we expect an AI, which relies on the inputs and instructions we provide, to interpret it correctly? This is precisely why I advocate for the development of a new hybrid language for us in day to day life, a language that reduces ambiguity by integrating precise symbols, mathematical expressions, and logic.
This language isn’t about simply adding a Unicode symbol for “benefit humans”; it’s about creating a structured way of communicating that forces us to be clear and unambiguous in our intentions. By doing so, we can better align AI systems with human goals and values, ensuring that their actions reflect what we mean, not just what we say.