Show notes are at https://stevelitchfield.com/sshow/chat.html
…
continue reading
Content provided by LessWrong. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by LessWrong or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.
Player FM - Podcast App
Go offline with the Player FM app!
Go offline with the Player FM app!
“What is it to solve the alignment problem? ” by Joe Carlsmith
MP3•Episode home
Manage episode 436691694 series 3364760
Content provided by LessWrong. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by LessWrong or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.
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.
In brief, I’ll say that you’ve solved the alignment problem if you’ve:
Outline:
(03:46) 1. Avoiding vs. handling vs. solving the problem
(15:32) 2. A framework for thinking about AI safety goals
(19:33) 3. Avoiding bad takeover
(24:03) 3.1 Avoiding vulnerability-to-alignment conditions
(27:18) 3.2 Ensuring that AI systems don’t try to takeover
(32:02) 3.3 Ensuring that takeover efforts don’t succeed
(33:07) 3.4 Ensuring that the takeover in question is somehow OK
(41:55) 3.5 What's the role of “corrigibility” here?
(42:17) 3.5.1 Some definitions of corrigibility
(50:10) 3.5.2 Is corrigibility necessary for “solving alignment”?
(53:34) 3.5.3 Does ensuring corrigibility raise issues that avoiding takeover does not?
(55:46) 4. Desired elicitation
(01:05:17) 5. The role of verification
(01:09:24) 5.1 Output-focused verification and process-focused verification
(01:16:14) 5.2 Does output-focused verification unlock desired elicitation?
(01:23:00) 5.3 What are our options for process-focused verification?
(01:29:25) 6. Does solving the alignment problem require some very sophisticated philosophical achievement re: our values on reflection?
(01:38:05) 7. Wrapping up
The original text contained 27 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.
The original text contained 3 images which were described by AI.
---
First published:
August 24th, 2024
Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/AFdvSBNgN2EkAsZZA/what-is-it-to-solve-the-alignment-problem-1
---
Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.
---
…
continue reading
In brief, I’ll say that you’ve solved the alignment problem if you’ve:
- avoided a bad form of AI takeover,
- built the dangerous kind of superintelligent AI agents,
- gained access to the main benefits of superintelligence, and
- become able to elicit some significant portion of those benefits from some of the superintelligent AI agents at stake in (2).[1]
- I discuss various options for avoiding bad takeover, notably:
- Avoiding what I call “vulnerability to alignment” conditions;
- Ensuring that AIs don’t try to take over;
- Preventing such attempts from succeeding;
- Trying to ensure that AI takeover is somehow OK. (The alignment [...]
Outline:
(03:46) 1. Avoiding vs. handling vs. solving the problem
(15:32) 2. A framework for thinking about AI safety goals
(19:33) 3. Avoiding bad takeover
(24:03) 3.1 Avoiding vulnerability-to-alignment conditions
(27:18) 3.2 Ensuring that AI systems don’t try to takeover
(32:02) 3.3 Ensuring that takeover efforts don’t succeed
(33:07) 3.4 Ensuring that the takeover in question is somehow OK
(41:55) 3.5 What's the role of “corrigibility” here?
(42:17) 3.5.1 Some definitions of corrigibility
(50:10) 3.5.2 Is corrigibility necessary for “solving alignment”?
(53:34) 3.5.3 Does ensuring corrigibility raise issues that avoiding takeover does not?
(55:46) 4. Desired elicitation
(01:05:17) 5. The role of verification
(01:09:24) 5.1 Output-focused verification and process-focused verification
(01:16:14) 5.2 Does output-focused verification unlock desired elicitation?
(01:23:00) 5.3 What are our options for process-focused verification?
(01:29:25) 6. Does solving the alignment problem require some very sophisticated philosophical achievement re: our values on reflection?
(01:38:05) 7. Wrapping up
The original text contained 27 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.
The original text contained 3 images which were described by AI.
---
First published:
August 24th, 2024
Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/AFdvSBNgN2EkAsZZA/what-is-it-to-solve-the-alignment-problem-1
---
Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.
---
324 episodes
MP3•Episode home
Manage episode 436691694 series 3364760
Content provided by LessWrong. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by LessWrong or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.
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.
In brief, I’ll say that you’ve solved the alignment problem if you’ve:
Outline:
(03:46) 1. Avoiding vs. handling vs. solving the problem
(15:32) 2. A framework for thinking about AI safety goals
(19:33) 3. Avoiding bad takeover
(24:03) 3.1 Avoiding vulnerability-to-alignment conditions
(27:18) 3.2 Ensuring that AI systems don’t try to takeover
(32:02) 3.3 Ensuring that takeover efforts don’t succeed
(33:07) 3.4 Ensuring that the takeover in question is somehow OK
(41:55) 3.5 What's the role of “corrigibility” here?
(42:17) 3.5.1 Some definitions of corrigibility
(50:10) 3.5.2 Is corrigibility necessary for “solving alignment”?
(53:34) 3.5.3 Does ensuring corrigibility raise issues that avoiding takeover does not?
(55:46) 4. Desired elicitation
(01:05:17) 5. The role of verification
(01:09:24) 5.1 Output-focused verification and process-focused verification
(01:16:14) 5.2 Does output-focused verification unlock desired elicitation?
(01:23:00) 5.3 What are our options for process-focused verification?
(01:29:25) 6. Does solving the alignment problem require some very sophisticated philosophical achievement re: our values on reflection?
(01:38:05) 7. Wrapping up
The original text contained 27 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.
The original text contained 3 images which were described by AI.
---
First published:
August 24th, 2024
Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/AFdvSBNgN2EkAsZZA/what-is-it-to-solve-the-alignment-problem-1
---
Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.
---
…
continue reading
In brief, I’ll say that you’ve solved the alignment problem if you’ve:
- avoided a bad form of AI takeover,
- built the dangerous kind of superintelligent AI agents,
- gained access to the main benefits of superintelligence, and
- become able to elicit some significant portion of those benefits from some of the superintelligent AI agents at stake in (2).[1]
- I discuss various options for avoiding bad takeover, notably:
- Avoiding what I call “vulnerability to alignment” conditions;
- Ensuring that AIs don’t try to take over;
- Preventing such attempts from succeeding;
- Trying to ensure that AI takeover is somehow OK. (The alignment [...]
Outline:
(03:46) 1. Avoiding vs. handling vs. solving the problem
(15:32) 2. A framework for thinking about AI safety goals
(19:33) 3. Avoiding bad takeover
(24:03) 3.1 Avoiding vulnerability-to-alignment conditions
(27:18) 3.2 Ensuring that AI systems don’t try to takeover
(32:02) 3.3 Ensuring that takeover efforts don’t succeed
(33:07) 3.4 Ensuring that the takeover in question is somehow OK
(41:55) 3.5 What's the role of “corrigibility” here?
(42:17) 3.5.1 Some definitions of corrigibility
(50:10) 3.5.2 Is corrigibility necessary for “solving alignment”?
(53:34) 3.5.3 Does ensuring corrigibility raise issues that avoiding takeover does not?
(55:46) 4. Desired elicitation
(01:05:17) 5. The role of verification
(01:09:24) 5.1 Output-focused verification and process-focused verification
(01:16:14) 5.2 Does output-focused verification unlock desired elicitation?
(01:23:00) 5.3 What are our options for process-focused verification?
(01:29:25) 6. Does solving the alignment problem require some very sophisticated philosophical achievement re: our values on reflection?
(01:38:05) 7. Wrapping up
The original text contained 27 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.
The original text contained 3 images which were described by AI.
---
First published:
August 24th, 2024
Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/AFdvSBNgN2EkAsZZA/what-is-it-to-solve-the-alignment-problem-1
---
Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.
---
324 episodes
All episodes
×Welcome to Player FM!
Player FM is scanning the web for high-quality podcasts for you to enjoy right now. It's the best podcast app and works on Android, iPhone, and the web. Signup to sync subscriptions across devices.