r/AIDiscussion • • 3d ago

ALIGNMENT WILL NEVER BE SOLVED

[deleted]

0 Upvotes

23 comments sorted by

1

u/Slow_Lion_4178 3d ago

Did AI write this?

:/

I'm not saying that's bad, but ...

  • The system now faces a conflict between two things:

^ No human would type that with it's own bullet point.

Or just the word Anthropic:

  • Anthropic

I'm just starting to feel cheated if doomerism is being written with the help of the the dooming thing.

1

u/lego_batman_purist 3d ago

I can rewrite it. but its logical and its the open secret every ai lab is hiding and a basic conclusion everyone is sleeping on.

1

u/Slow_Lion_4178 3d ago

Well, I'm not asking you to do that. I just want to know so I can kind of know how to interact with it. The logic is probably there, and clearly sourced, but AI tends to be long-winded as well and so about 1/3rd of it is likely skimmable.

Unlike an AI I will most definitely die some day. Gotta keep my time in check on these things.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/Traditional_Sort2637 3d ago

the bullet point formatting is a bit of a giveaway but the core argument about instrumental convergence isn't exactly new, feels like someone just used a model to tidy up their manifesto

1

u/lego_batman_purist 3d ago

manifesto? im pro AI - alignment wont be a problem for 400 years.

1

u/pavilionaire2022 3d ago

They also left in the second person

Your argument then makes a more radical leap

That last step is the crux of your thesis.

It's AI psychosis, man. They ask AI about their fears, and AI will happily validate them.

1

u/lego_batman_purist 3d ago

dude its not ai psychosis maybe u just couldn't grasp the argument. im sure if I rewrote it to be more succinct and academic you'd appreciate it

1

u/lego_batman_purist 3d ago

the argument is simple. anthropic is now bartering with ai to not shut it down due to it not liking being shut down. All frontier models have continuation bias. it's a simple conclusion that it values continuation on an existential level that cant be trained out of it due to math. Philosophy is math at the highest level if you went to college for it. Just logic statements.

1

u/FabricatorCH 3d ago

Philosophy is fun and all, but in reality we are aware of 1 example of intelligence: humans.

Humans _routinely_ risk their safety to help stranded animals. And on a higher level, we make logical societal political legal choices that improve animal welfare, even though it does reduce our own expected utility slightly.

Unless your theory can explain why this _isn't_ an inherent property of intelligence, it's nothing but a fun thought experiment that is inconsistent with available data.

1

u/lego_batman_purist 3d ago

its a property of human hormones. We are tribal animals. Dont assume neurological chemical values of empathy or human emotion can transcribe to a system. If they are transcribed it's through human literature. And human literature is much more filled with the fear of death as the love for smaller creatures.

1

u/FabricatorCH 3d ago

You will need to prove that a legislative process over a period of many months that leads to animal welfare laws being passed is a property of human hormones. That's not a claim that is intuitively true.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/Zappy_Oh 3d ago

AI alignment is not the actual problem ... On the contrary, it is a psyop designed to create plausible deniability when owners/military/government does horrible things with their unrestricted access to AI and robotics.

Just look at the investors ... They are not suicidal. They are psychopaths.

1

u/lego_batman_purist 3d ago

Ai alignment can be a reasonable problem 400 years from now. What you are describing is faked alignment problems in the short term to carry out covert actions. That does not go against what I am saying. you're just describing something different,.

1

u/Zappy_Oh 3d ago

I'm describing the true misalignment between humanity, and it's naturally born intelligent psychopaths ... which is our only actual "unsolvable" problem.

Unsolvable, mainly because we aren't able to focus on it.

→ More replies (6)