Difference between revisions of "Different senses of claims about AGI"
(Created page with "when making claims about AGI like "how much compute will AGI use?" or "will AGI be clean or messy?" there are several senses/scenarios of AGI we could be talking about: * cl...") |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
* claims about an ideal aligned AGI | * claims about an ideal aligned AGI | ||
* claims about a theoretically possible "optimal" AGI | * claims about a theoretically possible "optimal" AGI | ||
| + | |||
| + | an example is [https://agentfoundations.org/item?id=1228 this comment] by [[Nate]]: "Indeed, if I thought one ''had'' to understand good consequentialist reasoning in order to design a highly capable AI system, I’d be less worried by a decent margin." the general MIRI view that you can get to the first AGI without really understanding anything, whereas to get an aligned AGI you do need to understand things. | ||
Revision as of 23:09, 18 February 2020
when making claims about AGI like "how much compute will AGI use?" or "will AGI be clean or messy?" there are several senses/scenarios of AGI we could be talking about:
- claims about the first AGI that will probably appear
- claims about an ideal aligned AGI
- claims about a theoretically possible "optimal" AGI
an example is this comment by Nate: "Indeed, if I thought one had to understand good consequentialist reasoning in order to design a highly capable AI system, I’d be less worried by a decent margin." the general MIRI view that you can get to the first AGI without really understanding anything, whereas to get an aligned AGI you do need to understand things.
