Utility functions are much more useful descriptions for consequentialist agents than other varieties of agents, but I agree they have at least some use for all types of agents.
The context of that question is a discussion between some SI folks and some SI critics, where some SI publications had assumed that agents will have internal utility functions and some dangers associated with utility functions. The same conclusions may hold for agents without internal utility functions- but new arguments need to made for that to be clear.
No, a utility function is just a useful way of describing how agents behave, whether or not it’s explicitly represented in it’s code.
Utility functions are much more useful descriptions for consequentialist agents than other varieties of agents, but I agree they have at least some use for all types of agents.
The context of that question is a discussion between some SI folks and some SI critics, where some SI publications had assumed that agents will have internal utility functions and some dangers associated with utility functions. The same conclusions may hold for agents without internal utility functions- but new arguments need to made for that to be clear.