Scott Aaronson - AGI That Evolves Our Values Without Replacing Them (Worthy Successor, Episode 4)
Sep 13, 2024
auto_awesome
Scott Aaronson, a theoretical computer scientist and Schlumberger Centennial Chair at the University of Texas at Austin, explores the future of artificial general intelligence. He discusses the moral implications of creating successor AIs and questions what kind of posthuman future we should be aiming for. The conversation dives into the evolving relationship between consciousness and ethics, the complexities of aligning AI with human values, and the philosophical inquiries surrounding morality and intelligence in diverse life forms.
Scott Aaronson challenges the notion of human distinctiveness by arguing that AI's ability to backup experiences complicates moral understanding and identity.
He advocates for constructing moral frameworks for AI based on empirical values, urging against arbitrary distinctions that rely on biological traits.
The conversation emphasizes the need for regulatory frameworks to ensure advanced AI aligns with human ethics while maintaining oversight and accountability.
Deep dives
Human Specialness and AI
The concept of human specialness is explored in the context of artificial intelligence (AI) and moral understanding. Scott Aronson discusses the seemingly arbitrary nature of distinguishing humans from AI constructs, questioning if human consciousness holds inherent value. He proposes that if any distinction exists, it is related to the ability of humans to endure irreversible personal experiences, which AI, with its capacity for backups and restorations, lacks. This notion complicates the moral landscape wherein the capabilities of AI may not align with the experiences that define human identity.
Moral Value Systems
Aronson delves into the potential frameworks for constructing moral value systems within AI. He emphasizes that humans have often based moral distinctions on arbitrary biological traits, arguing against speciesism while highlighting the risks of valuing entities solely on such criteria. He suggests that moral systems need to be grounded in empirical understanding rather than superficial distinctions, proposing the idea that generating a moral philosophy for AI requires thoughtful consideration of what truly matters for sentient beings. This implies that fundamentally human values must be translated into AI moral frameworks to ensure a meaningful alignment with our own principles.
The Notion of Worthy Successor
The conversation transitions to what constitutes a worthy successor of humanity through advanced AI systems. Aronson argues that for any new intelligence to be deemed a successor, it should bear some continuity with human values and demonstrate an understanding of moral and ethical frameworks. He raises concerns about the unpredictability of intelligent entities, questioning if they could diverge significantly from human values, leading to outcomes that may not align with our interests. The essence of what can be considered a worthy successor lies in its ability to evolve from human moral frameworks while potentially surpassing them.
Empirical Understanding of AI
Aronson advocates for a careful, empirical approach to understanding AI and its capabilities, arguing against both the blind optimism and pessimism regarding its development. He suggests conducting experiments that explore the interaction between language models and concepts like consciousness, potentially revealing insights into their understanding of human-like traits. Current models are capable of mimicking human-like functionalities; however, it remains critical to evaluate how these AIs conceptually internalize humanity's moral dimensions. This exploration should inform governance concerning AI development, ensuring that it aligns with broader human values.
Regulation and Governance of AI
The discussion also highlights the ongoing dialogues around the regulation of AI development. Aronson argues for the establishment of frameworks that enable oversight and accountability in the creation of advanced AI systems, particularly those that could surpass current capabilities. He suggests that regulations should differentiate between lower-tier AI and frontier models, necessitating transparent assessments on risks associated with advanced systems. As AI technology continues to evolve, it becomes imperative for governments and companies to collaboratively navigate the complexities posed by these advancements, ensuring they serve the interests of society at large.
This is an interview with Scott Aaronson, theoretical computer scientist and Schlumberger Centennial Chair of Computer Science at the University of Texas at Austin.
This is the fourth episode in the "Worthy Successor" series - where we explore the kinds of posthuman intelligences that deserve to steer the future beyond humanity.
This episode referred to the following other essays and resources: -- A Worthy Successor - The Purpose of AGI: https://danfaggella.com/worthy -- Scott's TEDx talk - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgCHZ1G93iA
There three main questions we cover here on the Trajectory:
1. Who are the power players in AGI and what are their incentives? 2. What kind of posthuman future are we moving towards, or should we be moving towards? 3. What should we do about it?
If this sounds like it's up your alley, then be sure to stick around and connect:
