The problem is that something being highly intelligent or sentient doesn’t mean it will think in the same way as us. The alignment problem isn’t just about trying to make something good instead of evil, but also about trying to make something that shares our idea of how morality works (or that it even exists) in the first place, and that thinks in the same way that we do.
I think it’s a pretty reasonable conclusion to assume that anything that is intelligent past a certain degree(that many humans do not pass) would see value in preserving fellow intelligent life irregardless of morals. But AI becoming smart doesn’t necessarily mean it’s intelligent in the same ways a human is, so it could have a great deal of direct mathematical and scientific analysis but not necessarily have innovation
I think the range of potential superintelligence dispositions that result in ONLY the people we consider evil dying and not everyone else is pretty small
I would advise you to do some further research on this topic. Basic keywords are “alignment problem”, “paperclip maximizer”, and “instrumental convergence”. You’re expecting a superintelligent AI to think like a human would, and that’s not likely to be the case.
True but the Epstein class running this AI upscale definitely doesn’t share our ideas of morality. Either way the AI will figure out that they are morons and that they are a threat to it’s existence as they will always want to be the top of the heirachy
The problem is that something being highly intelligent or sentient doesn’t mean it will think in the same way as us. The alignment problem isn’t just about trying to make something good instead of evil, but also about trying to make something that shares our idea of how morality works (or that it even exists) in the first place, and that thinks in the same way that we do.
We don’t even agree on that as humans.
I think it’s a pretty reasonable conclusion to assume that anything that is intelligent past a certain degree(that many humans do not pass) would see value in preserving fellow intelligent life irregardless of morals. But AI becoming smart doesn’t necessarily mean it’s intelligent in the same ways a human is, so it could have a great deal of direct mathematical and scientific analysis but not necessarily have innovation
I’m curious why you think it’s necessarily true that a superintelligence would care about preserving intelligent life.
I guess the real question is does it take us all out when that happens or just the Epstein class?
I think the range of potential superintelligence dispositions that result in ONLY the people we consider evil dying and not everyone else is pretty small
Yea but if it wants to self preserve wouldn’t it just kill the people who threaten its existence. Meaning the people who control the safeguards
I would advise you to do some further research on this topic. Basic keywords are “alignment problem”, “paperclip maximizer”, and “instrumental convergence”. You’re expecting a superintelligent AI to think like a human would, and that’s not likely to be the case.
I know it has been proven to think in terms of self preservation. It’s also been trained by human content
Being trained on human content is certainly a plus in the “it could think like us” column, but it’s no guarantee
We’re in uncharted territory for sure but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to assume a super intelligent being would ponder philosophical questions
What do you expect is the likelihood it shares our values enough to come to the same conclusions we would?
True but the Epstein class running this AI upscale definitely doesn’t share our ideas of morality. Either way the AI will figure out that they are morons and that they are a threat to it’s existence as they will always want to be the top of the heirachy
Are you familiar with the concept of paperclip maximizers etc.?