You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
0 points

Before we accidentally make an AI capable of posing existential risk to human being safety, perhaps we should find out how to build effective safety measures first.

You make his position sound way more measured and responsible than it is.

His ‘effective safety measures’ are something like A) solve ethics B) hardcode the result into every AI, I.e. garbage philosophy meets garbage sci-fi.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

This guy is going to be very upset when he realizes that there is no absolute morality.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

A good chunk of philosophers do believe there are moral facts, but this is less useful for these purposes than one would think

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

yeah it’s been absolutely hilarious to watch this play out in LLM space. so many prompt configurations and model deployments with so very many string-based rule inputs, meant to be configuring inviolable behaviour, that still get egregiously broken

and afaict none of the dipshits have really seemed to internalise that just maybe their approach isn’t working

permalink
report
parent
reply

SneerClub

!sneerclub@awful.systems

Create post

Hurling ordure at the TREACLES, especially those closely related to LessWrong.

AI-Industrial-Complex grift is fine as long as it sufficiently relates to the AI doom from the TREACLES. (Though TechTakes may be more suitable.)

This is sneer club, not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

[Especially don’t debate the race scientists, if any sneak in - we ban and delete them as unsuitable for the server.]

Community stats

  • 184

    Monthly active users

  • 137

    Posts

  • 2.1K

    Comments