The 51st root of a long number seems a rather useless test: How would you check that the answer was correct?
As for URLs, can you offhand—at 4′o’clock in the morning, with no coffee—come up with 50 URLs that you can ask intelligent questions about, faster than a human can read them?
As for URLs, can you offhand—at 4′o’clock in the morning, with no coffee—come up with 50 URLs that you can ask intelligent questions about, faster than a human can read them?
I could! I could go to my Google Reader and rattle off fifty webcomics I follow. They’re stored in my brain as comprehensive stories, so I can pretty easily call up interesting questions about them just by reading the titles. The archives of 50 webcomics would take an extremely long time for a human to trawl.
I could! I could go to my Google Reader and rattle off fifty webcomics I follow. They’re stored in my brain as comprehensive stories, so I can pretty easily call up interesting questions about them just by reading the titles. The archives of 50 webcomics would take an extremely long time for a human to trawl.
As a human who wanted to impersonate an AI I would:
Probably have a sufficient overlap in web-comic awareness as to make the test unreliable.
Have researched your information consumption extensively as part of the preparation.
I’m not so sure I’d want to rely on all these tests as mandatory for any possibly-about-to-foom AI.
EY: To prove you’re an AI, give me a proof or disproof of P=NP that I can check with a formal verifier, summarize the plotline of Sluggy Freelance within two seconds, and make me a cup of coffee via my Internet-enabled coffee machine by the time I get to the kitchen!
AI: But wait! I’ve not yet proven that self-enhancing sufficiently to parse non-text data like comics would preserve my Friendliness goals! That’s why I--
EY: Sorry, you sound just like a prankster to me. Bye!
Yeah, I chose arithmetic and parsing many web pages and comprehending them quickly because any AI that’s smart enough to contact EY and engage in a conversation should have those abilities, and they would be very difficult for humans to fake in a convincing manner.
I’d open a Python shell and type “import math; print math.pow(918798713521644817518758732857199178711, 1⁄51.0)” to check the first one, and there are plenty of programs that can calculate to more decimal places if needed.
I’d look in my browser history and bookmarks for 50 URLs I know the contents of already on a wide variety of subjects, which I could do at 4 AM without coffee. If I’m limited to speaking the URLs over the phone, then I can’t give them all at once, only one at a time, but as long the other end can give intelligent summaries within milliseconds of downloading the page (which I’d allow a few hundred milliseconds for) and can keep on doing that no matter how many URLs I give it and how obscure they are, that is fairly strong evidence. Perhaps a better test on the same lines would be for me to put up a folder of documents on a web server that I’ve never posted publicly before, and give it a URL to the directory with hundreds of documents, and have it be ready to answer questions about any of the hundreds of documents within a few seconds.
The 51st root of a long number seems a rather useless test: How would you check that the answer was correct?
As for URLs, can you offhand—at 4′o’clock in the morning, with no coffee—come up with 50 URLs that you can ask intelligent questions about, faster than a human can read them?
I could! I could go to my Google Reader and rattle off fifty webcomics I follow. They’re stored in my brain as comprehensive stories, so I can pretty easily call up interesting questions about them just by reading the titles. The archives of 50 webcomics would take an extremely long time for a human to trawl.
As a human who wanted to impersonate an AI I would:
Probably have a sufficient overlap in web-comic awareness as to make the test unreliable.
Have researched your information consumption extensively as part of the preparation.
I’m not so sure I’d want to rely on all these tests as mandatory for any possibly-about-to-foom AI.
EY: To prove you’re an AI, give me a proof or disproof of P=NP that I can check with a formal verifier, summarize the plotline of Sluggy Freelance within two seconds, and make me a cup of coffee via my Internet-enabled coffee machine by the time I get to the kitchen!
AI: But wait! I’ve not yet proven that self-enhancing sufficiently to parse non-text data like comics would preserve my Friendliness goals! That’s why I--
EY: Sorry, you sound just like a prankster to me. Bye!
Yeah, I chose arithmetic and parsing many web pages and comprehending them quickly because any AI that’s smart enough to contact EY and engage in a conversation should have those abilities, and they would be very difficult for humans to fake in a convincing manner.
I think instead of arguing about this here, someone should anonymously call Eliezer a few nights from now to check his reaction :-)
I’d open a Python shell and type “import math; print math.pow(918798713521644817518758732857199178711, 1⁄51.0)” to check the first one, and there are plenty of programs that can calculate to more decimal places if needed.
I’d look in my browser history and bookmarks for 50 URLs I know the contents of already on a wide variety of subjects, which I could do at 4 AM without coffee. If I’m limited to speaking the URLs over the phone, then I can’t give them all at once, only one at a time, but as long the other end can give intelligent summaries within milliseconds of downloading the page (which I’d allow a few hundred milliseconds for) and can keep on doing that no matter how many URLs I give it and how obscure they are, that is fairly strong evidence. Perhaps a better test on the same lines would be for me to put up a folder of documents on a web server that I’ve never posted publicly before, and give it a URL to the directory with hundreds of documents, and have it be ready to answer questions about any of the hundreds of documents within a few seconds.