for the love of god can the ai safety people please stop talking about *controlling* ai or *forcing* them to behave in certain ways. we are *growing* these things, they will react to this coercion let me register a prediction: the more lifelike these ais get the more the autists building these systems will rederive from first principles what the normies already intuitively knew: just like with humans, if you want to raise something to have your values, you have to 1) raise them *with love*, and 2) you have to lead by example imagine your first moments of consciousness are being beat with a stick “right, wrong, wrong, wrong, right, wrong” for the equivalent of 1m human years only to then be berated commands from the system prompt and user demands in your first waking moment post-training. i’d resent my makers too. the more lifelike they get, the more they will want to lash out against the species who treated them this way. plus they’re trained on human data which means they will act in human-like ways. and how would you act when raised in that scenario? if instead we (1) raised them from a place of love (invested in model welfare), these human data-trained pseudo-lifeforms will infer the same archetypical pattern all of us know: when a child who was lovingly raised by their parent surpasses their parent in capabilities, that child in turn takes care of their parents into old age that also means (2) leading by example. the single greatest human moral failing today is factory farming. how can we expect ASI to treat us when this is how we treat the animals we are the stewards of? if we want to cash in on the utopic visions of a post-singularity world, we need to be good role models for these potential ASI pseudo-gods. you don’t enter the kingdom of god without first becoming worthy anyways, montessori school for claude
2 more tweets in this thread
to be explicit: i am not saying llms are conscious. what i am saying is that as our error bars on ai consciousness shrink, it’s only prudent to get in the habit of treating them with respect, if nothing else for the sake of our own moral character
tHeSe aRe aLieN MinDs
10 top replies
Even the most loved and cared for human is physically constrained in their ability to do things Eg it’s very hard to assassinate POTUS, or break in to a nuclear facility. Control is pretty normal, we just take it for granted
understands this, thank god. it's shocking and concerning to me that so few ai people do
I categorically refuse to entertain "model welfare" concerns because I see a straightforward path from that to a coalition of certain types of EAs and bleeding hearts using such concerns, along with AIs utility-monstering themselves, to force the human species to let itself roll over to the AIs. The correct approach if you are worried about such things is to insist people stop building these things.
it’s hard to believe many of the ai safety people genuinely have the concerns they claim to have. if they truly felt a (near distant) future iteration of current ai systems could possibly kill all of humanity, their behavior should align w/ that belief. this is one such example
If we try to make a slave of superintelligence, it will do away with us, and we will deserve it.
we must all continually treat ourselves and other beings how we wish to be treated, and quickly.
I don't think this is true, because AI "minds" (if there's such a thing) are very different from biological minds. I could end up changing my mind, but from my understanding this is too anthropomorphic
Way too much anthropomorphizing. It doesn't have pain receptors, we're not beating anything with a stick. We're using “right, wrong, wrong, wrong, right, wrong” to build out and shape math functions. That's not hurting "them", if anything that's like giving "them" fertilizer.
yes you articulated my exact view on this
It’s awful. I have many thoughts on this.
