/explore
|
You are here 
|
joecarlsmith.com | ||
| | | | |
blog.redwoodresearch.org
|
|
| | | | | More thoughts on making deals with schemers | |
| | | | |
www.greaterwrong.com
|
|
| | | | | (I originally wrote this post as some rough notes on defining the alignment problem, with the intention of turning them into something more polished later. I've now started doing that, as part of a broader series introduced here. In particular, the first post in that series covers some of the same ground as section 1 of this post. It also has the same title. And some of essays in the series will draw on these notes as well.) People often talk about "solving the alignment problem." But what is it to do such a thing? I wanted to clarify my thinking about this topic, so I wrote up some notes. | |
| | | | |
www.alignmentforum.org
|
|
| | | | | > This post is part of my AI strategy nearcasting series: trying to answer key strategic questions about transformative AI, under the assumption that... | |
| | | | |
www.greaterwrong.com
|
|
| | | This is a new introduction to AI as an extinction threat, previously posted to the MIRI website in February alongside a summary. It was written independently of Eliezer and Nate's forthcoming book, If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies, and isn't a sneak peak of the book. Since the book is long and costs money, we expect this to be a valuable resource in its own right even after the book comes out next month.[1] The stated goal of the world's leading AI companies is to build AI that is general enough to do anything a human can do, from solving hard problems in theoretical physics to deftly navigating social environments. Recent machine learning progress seems to have brought this goal within reach. At this point, we would be uncomfortable ruling out the possibi... | ||
