Re: [sl4] to-do list for strong, nice AI

From: Matt Mahoney (
Date: Tue Oct 20 2009 - 09:22:33 MDT

Luke wrote:
> Alright, it is no wonder you guys can't get anything done. I start a single thread, with a single, simple purpose: to trade versions of a single document: the to-do list. And you all can't resist the urge to get into the most arcane, esoteric mathematical bullshit imaginable. "Degree of compressibility". "Test giver must have more information than test-taker". wank wank wank.

Because your checklist is wrong. Specifically, the first 3 steps are wrong. This invalidates the last 2 steps that depend on them. To quote:
This document implies dependencies only insofar as each step's dependencies should appear before that step. Note that other sequential orderings are possible while maintaining this constraint.

[ ] Compile design requirements for "friendly AI". When will we know we have succeeded?

[ ] Develop automated tests which will determine whether a given system is friendly to humans or not
[ ] Develop automated tests which will determine whether a given system is intelligent or not (IQ, whatever)
        (these tests should reflect the requirements laid out in the first step: "compile design requirements")

[ ] Develop prototype systems and apply these tests to them. Refactor tests as necessary in the case we find that some requirement is not specified in the tests.

[ ] Continue refactoring prototypes until we have a system which passes both the intelligence tests and friendliness tests.
<<<1. The definition of "Friendly AI" has an algorithmic complexity of 10^17 bits. Roughly, it means to do what people want, with conflicts resolved as an ideal secrecy-free market would resolve them. So your definition has to describe what 10^10 people want, and how much they want it, which means your definition must describe what they know, and each person knows about 10^7 bits that nobody else knows. My definition is cheating, of course, because I am pointing to human brains instead of describing what they contain.

Also, I haven't defined "people". Does it include embryos, animals, slaves, women, and illegal immigrants? (Don't give me an answer that depends on your cultural beliefs). Does it include future human-animal-robot-software hybrids? Do all people have equal rights or do we weight rights by how much money you have like in a real market?

2. You can't test for friendliness unless you already know that the tester is friendly. How do you know it isn't lying?

3. You can't test for intelligence unless you are smarter than the test taker. Otherwise, how do you know that it is giving the right answers?

So the result is we will find another way to build AI. There is a US$1 quadrillion incentive to get it done. That's the value of global human labor divided by market interest rates.

Just in case you haven't noticed, the internet is getting smarter.
-- Matt Mahoney,

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:01:05 MDT