alt Hacker NewsI might be missing something here, but could this concept not also be used in the same way for harm? For example if a model is trained to replicated a sucessfull scammer?
I might be missing something here, but could this concept not also be used in the same way for harm? For example if a model is trained to replicated a sucessfull scammer?
Definitely! In fact that seems to be a central aspect of the proposition:
> Above all, a GA should amplify the principal, and not simply substitute for them for someone else’s purposes or benefit.
[…]
> A GA must be aligned with its principal. It should not be designed to manipulate or control or guide the principal in any way which does not derive from the principal themselves. “Constitutional AI”, “Terms of Service”, “social harmony” etc. may all have their place, particularly for widely deployed superintelligent systems—but inside the privacy of a GA, the principal must have freedom from optimization pressure.
…I read this to suggest that it should amplify a scammer’s scamming, a thinker’s thinking, a tinkerer’s tinkering, a cop’s sleuthing… and I’d imagine it implies amplifying a person’s capability to avoid being scammed, too…
One man’s scam is another man’s “pro-social nudge” and another man’s “attractive opportunity” and another’s “advertisement for a delightful consumer wonder” and another’s “patriotic duty to sustain demand to prop up the too-big-to-fail ideas we bet the whole economy on.”
When you fix and operationalize all values centrally, universally, and externally to the principal… that’s current-gen frontier chatbots, not Gwern’s GA concept.