Listening to the Harris & Yudkowsky podcast on AI. Realized that Yudkowsky likely simply paid his test subjects more than the $10 & $20 prize to let him out of the box.
-
-
I've always wanted to ask whether the parameters allowed you to credibly claim abilities of an AGI or not, e.g. offer cure for cancer.
-
In real life, a superintelligence certainly has the *capability*, it's trustworthiness that's in doubt.
-
Right, but in the experiment if they said "prove it" I was wondering whether proof was role played or not
-
In real life if you tell a superintelligence "prove you can cure cancer" then it has probably just escaped the box (though the game rules disallow that conclusion), but if not, it can certainly prove it!
-
No tricks involve both no payments as well as “when you gave me access to this you effectively let me out” scenarios? Why not publish various exchanges at this point?
-
1) preserve future experiments, 2) replicate the feeling of knowing it would happen but not knowing how, 3) avoiding the familiarity discount of "sure sure that's a known trick BUT"
-
I believe that the argument is that we cant have an unaligned AGI in a box to begin with as if we get to that point we’ve already lost. But it seems a bit fatalistic to assume it is over then and to not give people access to some of the best arguments ahead of time.
-
More importantly, as people outside of Yudkowsky’s direct contact circles start working on this (like say, many Chinese govt funded researchers) the benefit of being more convincing to a specific individual gets smaller compared to the info being out there and available.
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.