From: H C (lphege@hotmail.com)
Date: Wed Jun 14 2006 - 14:09:03 MDT
>From: Keith Henson <hkhenson@rogers.com>
>Reply-To: sl4@sl4.org
>To: sl4@sl4.org
>Subject: Human motivations was Two draft papers: Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006
>18:12:02 -0400
>
>At 11:34 PM 6/12/2006 -0700, Eliezer wrote:
>>Robin Hanson wrote:
>
>snip
>
>>>You warn repeatedly about how easy is is to fool oneself into thinking
>>>one understands AI, and you want readers to apply this to their
>>>intuitions about the goals an AI may have.
>>
>>The danger is anthropomorphic thinking, in general. The case of goals is
>>an extreme case where we have specific, hardwired, wrong intuitions. But
>>more generally, all your experience is in a human world, and it distorts
>>your thinking. Perception is the perception of differences. When
>>something doesn't vary in our experience, we stop even perceiving it; it
>>becomes as invisible as the oxygen in the air. The most insidious biases,
>>as we both know, are the ones that people don't see.
>
>I agree.
>
>Perhaps understandability is an argument to imbue AIs with *some* human
>motivations, just so we can have a chance of understanding them.
>
>Humans have a few really awful psychological traits but activating the ones
>we know about might be avoidable.
>
>Keith Henson
>
An argument?
Maybe it's an interesting thing to consider in relation to Friendliness, but
it is of hardly the technical calibre required for it to present any kind of
argument.
-Hank
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:56 MDT