/explore
|
You are here 
|
www.alignmentforum.org | ||
| | | | |
joecarlsmith.com
A high-level picture of how we might get from here to safe superintelligence. |
|
| | | | | ||
| | | | |
www.greaterwrong.com
TL;DR:Strong problem-solving systems can be built from AI systems that play diverse roles, LLMs can readily play diverse roles in role architectures, and AI systems based on role architectures can be practical, safe, and effective in undertaking complex and consequential tasks. This article explores the practicalities and challenges of aligning large language models (LLMs[1]) to play central roles in performing tasks safely and effectively. It highlights the potential value of Open Agency and related role architectures in aligning AI for general applications while mitigating risks. |
|
| | | | | ||
| | | | |
www.lesswrong.com
Epistemic Effort: ~75 hours of work put into this document ... |
|
| | | | | ||
| | | | |
www.lesswrong.com
Comment by paulfchristiano - A common view is that the timelines to risky AI are largely driven by hardware progress and deep learning progress occurring outside of OpenAI. Many people (both at OpenAI and elsewhere) believe that questions of who builds AI and how are very important relative to acceleration of AI timelines. This is related to lower estimates of alignment risk, higher estimates of the importance of geopolitical conflict, and (perhaps most importantly of all) radically lower estimates for the amount of useful alignment progress that would occur this far in advance of AI if progress were to be slowed down. Below I'll also discuss two arguments that delaying AI progress would on net reduce alignment risk which I often encountered at OpenAI. I thi... |
|
| | | |||
