Comments by "Taxtro" (@MrCmon113) on "AI? Just Sandbox it... - Computerphile" video.

  1. What human? People disagree. Should it never do anything an Islamist disagrees with? An AGI needs superhuman miral judgement. A measure that is independent from any particular person.
    2
  2. Yeah, to me it's just a complete non-sequitur. If the basilisk already existed and hardcode a response into itself that would be another story.
    1
  3. The ants are encircling your foot asking themselves where you could possibly escape to.... The problem is not physically turning off the computer that runs the AGI, the problem is that you wouldn't even want it. You wouldn't know when to press stop. You'd defend that button with life. That's how intelligence works.
    1
  4. No, we need to make sure that the expected outcome is slightly better than status quo and then go for it.
    1
  5.  @KipColeman  No. That's like a dozen ants trying to encircle a human.
    1
  6. You obviously don't understand Gödel. Gödels incompleteness has nothing to do with learning. There is a similar circumstance for learning (no free lunch theorem), but theoretically there is really no problem with AGI. You know why? Because we exist. And AGI is no more than human level intelligence. Do you think Gödel proved that humans don't exist?
    1
  7. Firstly people strongly disagree about what's wrong or right. Secondly an AGI must have BETTER moral judgment than any human. Thirdly the first AGI studying human psychlogy would already lead to a computronium shockwave as it tries to learn everything about it's goal and whether it reached it.
    1
  8. That answer can only come from someone, who doesn't understand what intelligence means.
    1