OpenAI's Researchers: Protecting Against AI’s Existential Threat
1–10 of 62 posts
Re: OpenAI's Researchers: Protecting Against AI’s Existential Threat
#2The real goal should be making a super AI that is worthy of being humanity's collective offspring. The bias in favor of our bags-of-mostly-water is provincial. All we really need is quality genetic engineering of our super AI baby, so we don't end up with a Frankenstein monster.
Humanity's procreation of a superior intelligence is objectively a good thing. Humans do not sit on any plateau of goodness or intelligence. Like all lifeforms, our goal should be to hand our future to better and better offspring.
As long as this super intelligence leads to super ethics and super consciousness, it should be humanity's greatest accomplishment to be replaced by our God-like procreation.
Re: OpenAI's Researchers: Protecting Against AI’s Existential Threat
#3The real goal should be making a super AI that is worthy of being humanity's collective offspring. The bias in favor of our bags-of-mostly-water is provincial. All we really need is quality genetic engineering of our super AI baby, so we don't end up with a Frankenstein monster. Humanity's procreation of a superior intelligence is objectively a good thing. Humans do not sit on any plateau of goodness or intelligence.…
That's a very very uncertain "as long."
Re: OpenAI's Researchers: Protecting Against AI’s Existential Threat
#4The real goal should be making a super AI that is worthy of being humanity's collective offspring. The bias in favor of our bags-of-mostly-water is provincial. All we really need is quality genetic engineering of our super AI baby, so we don't end up with a Frankenstein monster. Humanity's procreation of a superior intelligence is objectively a good thing. Humans do not sit on any plateau of goodness or intelligence.…
> Like all lifeforms, our goal should be to hand our future to better and better offspring.
How did you determine the moral purpose of all life? I say our goal should be to hand our future off to our own biological offspring, the members of our species, as evolution has optimized us to do. What makes your proposed purpose more correct than mine?
Re: OpenAI's Researchers: Protecting Against AI’s Existential Threat
#5Too bad OpenAI has less than a handful of people working on safety and only one safety paper (to be published in a few months) throughout these two years of OpenAI's existence. Actions speak louder than words.
Re: OpenAI's Researchers: Protecting Against AI’s Existential Threat
#6The real goal should be making a super AI that is worthy of being humanity's collective offspring. The bias in favor of our bags-of-mostly-water is provincial. All we really need is quality genetic engineering of our super AI baby, so we don't end up with a Frankenstein monster. Humanity's procreation of a superior intelligence is objectively a good thing. Humans do not sit on any plateau of goodness or intelligence.…
That's a very very uncertain "as long."
It's a bet that a super intelligent brain will be far more capable than a primate brain.
Edit: In other words, how could it fail to grasp and obtain our very basic level of consciousness?
Re: OpenAI's Researchers: Protecting Against AI’s Existential Threat
#7The real goal should be making a super AI that is worthy of being humanity's collective offspring. The bias in favor of our bags-of-mostly-water is provincial. All we really need is quality genetic engineering of our super AI baby, so we don't end up with a Frankenstein monster. Humanity's procreation of a superior intelligence is objectively a good thing. Humans do not sit on any plateau of goodness or intelligence.…
> Like all lifeforms, our goal should be to hand our future to better and better offspring. How did you determine the moral purpose of all life? I say our goal should be to hand our future off to our own biological offspring, the members of our species, as evolution has optimized us to do. What makes your proposed purpose more correct than mine?
It is (kind of) our biological offspring, we'll just create it using our brain fluids instead of our reproductive fluids ;-)
Your limited primate brain is the reason you want primate offspring. This bias is in our DNA and part of our evolution. It's a limitation that your super AI offspring would not have.
Re: OpenAI's Researchers: Protecting Against AI’s Existential Threat
#8The real goal should be making a super AI that is worthy of being humanity's collective offspring. The bias in favor of our bags-of-mostly-water is provincial. All we really need is quality genetic engineering of our super AI baby, so we don't end up with a Frankenstein monster. Humanity's procreation of a superior intelligence is objectively a good thing. Humans do not sit on any plateau of goodness or intelligence.…
I'm pretty sure I have a different objective function in mind here: unlike preceding lifeforms, our goal should be to hand a better and better future to each other (& offspring).
Re: OpenAI's Researchers: Protecting Against AI’s Existential Threat
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a very very uncertain "as long."
It's a bet that a super intelligent brain will be far more capable than a primate brain. Edit: In other words, how could it fail to grasp and obtain our very basic level of consciousness?
Being 'capable' is not the issue here.
Re: OpenAI's Researchers: Protecting Against AI’s Existential Threat
#10The real goal should be making a super AI that is worthy of being humanity's collective offspring. The bias in favor of our bags-of-mostly-water is provincial. All we really need is quality genetic engineering of our super AI baby, so we don't end up with a Frankenstein monster. Humanity's procreation of a superior intelligence is objectively a good thing. Humans do not sit on any plateau of goodness or intelligence.…
"As long as this super intelligence leads to super ethics and super consciousness"
That is begging the question, in the original sense. The entire question here is how do we do that when there is no a priori reason to assume that a superintelligence will have either of those things, and indeed, most if not all of our best techniques today would certainly not produce those things if they did lead to explosive intelligence.