>> Your
argument about the difference between a GS and an MES system is a strawman
argument. Omohundro never made the argument, nor did he touch on it as far
as I can tell. I did not find his paper very interesting either, but you
are the one who seems to be pulling conclusions out of thin air.
>> You can introduce the GS vs MES argument if you want, but you cannot then argue from the implication that everyone has to refer to it or else stand guilty of pulling arguments out of thin air.
>> You can introduce the GS vs MES argument if you want, but you cannot then argue from the implication that everyone has to refer to it or else stand guilty of pulling arguments out of thin air.
I'm afraid that
I have to agree with Jim here, Richard. Nothing you've said convinces me
that GS vs. MES belongs in this argument at all. I disagree with
Omohundro's final conclusions but believe that his arguments apply equally well
-- in a short-sighted sense (see next e-mail) -- to either
architecture.
----- Original Message -----From: Jim BromerSent: Sunday, May 25, 2008 6:26 AMSubject: Re: [agi] Goal Driven Systems and AI Dangers [WAS Re: Singularity Outcomes...]
----- Original Message ----
From: Richard Loosemore <rpwl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Richard Loosemore said:
If you look at his paper carefully, you will see that at every step of
the way he introduces assumptions as if they were obvious facts ... and
in all the cases I have bothered to think through, these all stem from
the fact that he has a particular kind of mechanism in mind (one which
has a goal stack and a utility function). There are so many of these
assertions pulled out of think air that I found it gave me a headache
just to read the paper. ...
But this is silly: where was his examination of the systems various
motives? Where did he consider the difference between different
implementations of the entire motivational mechanism (my distinction
between GS and MES systems)? Nowhere. He just asserts, without
argument, that the system would be obsessed, and that any attempt by us
to put locks on the system would result in "an arms race of measures and
countermeasures."
That is just one example of how he pulls conclusions out of thin air.
-------------------------------------------
Your argument about the difference between a GS and an MES system is a strawman argument. Omohundro never made the argument, nor did he touch on it as far as I can tell. I did not find his paper very interesting either, but you are the one who seems to be pulling conclusions out of thin air.
You can introduce the GS vs MES argument if you want, but you cannot then argue from the implication that everyone has to refer to it or else stand guilty of pulling arguments out of thin air.
His paper Nature of Self Improving Artificial Intelligence September 5, 2007, revised January 21, 2008 provides a lot of reasoning. I don't find the reasoning compelling, but the idea that he is just pulling conclusions out of thin air is just bluster.
Jim Bromer