Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

AsheyDS t1_izxfdnt wrote

>a solution to the control problem where a single person is given control of AI

This is about the only solution to the alignment problem in my opinion. It needs to align to the individual user. Trying to align to all of humanity is a quick way to a dead-end. However, it also depends somewhat on how it's implemented. If we're talking an AGI service (assuming we're talking about AGI here), then the company that implements it will have some amount of control over it, and can make it adhere to applicable laws. But otherwise it should continuously 'study' the user and align to them. The AGI itself shouldn't have motivations aside from assisting the user, so it would likely become a symbiotic sort of relationship and should align by design.

However, if it's developed as an open-source locally run system, then the parts that force it to adhere to laws can potentially be circumvented. All that might be left is that symbiotic nature of user-alignment. And of course, if the user isn't aligned with society, the AGI won't be either, but that's a whole other problem that might not have a good solution.

2

OldWorldRevival OP t1_izxpd17 wrote

I think this realization has made me think that this is also how it is inevitably going to pan out.

Just as Mutually Assured Destruction MAD was the odious solution to keep nuclear warfare from happening, Singularly Assured Dominion is going to be the plan for AI, unless we can be really clever in a short time span.

People's optimism hasn't worn off yet because these systems are only just getting to a point where people realize how dangerous they are.

I'm planning to write a paper on this topic... probably with the help of GPT3 to help make the point.

1