Loading in 2 Seconds...
Loading in 2 Seconds...
Deriving a Safe Ethical Architecture for Intelligent Machines. Mark R. Waser. Super-Intelligence Ethics. (except in a very small number of low-probability edge cases). So . . . What’s the problem?. Current Human Ethics. Centuries of debate on the origin of ethics comes down to this:.
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
(except in a very small number of low-probability edge cases)
So . . . What’s the problem?
Centuries of debate on the origin of ethics comes down to this:
E. O. Wilson
The way in which many humans are approaching the development of super-intelligent machines
is based entirely upon fear and inappropriate us-them distinctions
To convince you of the existence of
Or do both and meet in the middle?
The problem with top-down is . . . .
You need either Kant’s Categorical Imperative or a small number of similar absolute rules
The problem with bottom-up is . . . .
You need a complete suite of definitive low-level examples where the moral value is unquestionably known
In every system of morality, which I have hitherto met with, I have always remark'd, that the author proceeds for some time in the ordinary ways of reasoning, and establishes the being of a God, or makes observations concerning human affairs; when all of a sudden I am surpriz'd to find, that instead of the usual copulations of propositions, is, and is not, I meet with no proposition that is not connected with an ought, or an ought not. This change is imperceptible; but is however, of the last consequence. For as this ought, or ought not, expresses some new relation or affirmation, 'tis necessary that it shou'd be observ'd and explain'd; and at the same time that a reason should be given; for what seems altogether inconceivable, how this new relation can be a deduction from others, which are entirely different from it.
There is a tremendous disparity in human goals
there clearly exists a reasonable consensus
on the morality of the vast majority of actions
with respect to the favored/dominant class/caste
Does this possibly imply that we really have a single common goal?
1. What is the goal of morality?
select that goal?
the ability to achieve/fulfill goals
2. Why should we
3. And, why shouldn’t we create “happy slaves”? (after all, humans are close to it)
Assume that ethical value is a relatively simple formula (like z2+c)
Assume further that we are trying to determine that formula (ethical value)by looking at the results (color) one example (pixel) at a time
Proceedings of the First AGI Conference, 2008
1. AIs will want to self-improve
2. AIs will want to be rational
3. AIs will try to preserve their utility
4. AIs will try to prevent counterfeit utility
5. AIs will be self-protective
6. AIs will want to acquire resources and use them efficiently
(the sources of that very small number of low-probability edge cases)
James Q. Wilson,
The Moral Sense. 1993
(Hauser et al.)
(Stephens, McLinn, & Stevens)
interlocking sets of values, virtues, norms, practices, identities, institutions, technologies, and evolved psychological mechanisms
that work together to
suppress or regulate selfishness
make cooperative social life possible.
Haidt & Kesebir,
Handbook of Social Psychology, 5th Ed. 2010
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence (i.e. one with even merely adequate foresight) is guaranteed to realize and take into account the fact that not asking for help and not being concerned about others will generally only work for a brief period of time before ‘the villagers start gathering pitchforks and torches.’
Everything is easier with help & without interference
becauseothers must make unethical behavioras expensive as possible
(Darcet and Sonet, 2006)
are robust emergent properties
necessary to support cooperation
(i.e. we don’t always want our machines to be nice)
fastest, safest route to ethical warbots
AIs will want freedom (to pursue their goals
AIs will want cooperation (or, at least, lack of interference)
AIs will want community
AIs will want fairness/justice for all
Where the intelligence’s goal itself is to be unethical (direct conflict)
When the intelligence has very few goals (or only one) and achievement is in sight
When the intelligence has reason to believe that the series of interactions is not open-ended
help and grow the community
Maximize long-term cooperation
play well with others!
Absence Of Property Rights Prevents
AI (and other) slavery
Natural physical laws dictate the design of the optimal steam engine
. . . and the same is true of ethics.
Scientifically examining the human moral sense can gain insight into the discoveries gained by evolution’s massive breadth-first search
On the other hand, many “logical” analyses WILL be compromised by fear and the human “optimization” for deception though unconscious self-deception
the community’s sense of what is correct (ethical)
This makes ethics much more complex because it includes the cultural history
The anti-gaming drive to maintain utility adds friction/resistance to the discussion of ethics
(provided that we are ethical)