Okay, now with more cherrypicked example (from here, chapter 10, “Won’t AI differ from all the historical precedents?”):
If you study an immature AI in depth, manage to decode its mind entirely, develop a great theory of how it works that you validate on a bunch of examples, and use that theory to predict how the AI’s mind will change as it ascends to superintelligence and gains (for the first time) the very real option of grabbing the world for itself — even then you are, fundamentally, using a new and untested scientific theory to predict the results of an experiment that has not yet run, about what the AI will do when it really, actually, for real has the opportunity to grab power from the humans.
OMG, it was one sentence.
My version (well, my actual version is in Russian, here how the same changes would look in English):
Imagine: you study an immature AI in depth. You manage to decode its mind entirely. You develop a great theory of how it works. You validate this theory on a bunch of examples. You use that theory to predict how the AI’s mind will change as it ascends to superintelligence and gains (for the first time) the very real option of grabbing the world for itself. Even then you are, fundamentally, using a new and untested scientific theory to predict the results of an experiment that has not yet run, about what the AI will do when it really, actually, for real has the opportunity to grab power from the humans.
(I don’t know, do English-speaking people dislike repetition of “you” that much? In Russian most of “you” can be omitted.)
I think most of “you” can be omitted in English as well:
Imagine: you study an immature AI in depth. Decode its mind entirely. Develop a great theory of how it works. Validate this theory on a bunch of examples. Use that theory to predict how the AI’s mind will change as it ascends to superintelligence and gains (for the first time) the very real option of grabbing the world for itself. Even then, you are, fundamentally, using a new and untested scientific theory to predict the results of an experiment that has not yet run, about what the AI will do when it really, actually, for real has the opportunity to grab power from the humans.
Okay, now with more cherrypicked example (from here, chapter 10, “Won’t AI differ from all the historical precedents?”):
OMG, it was one sentence.
My version (well, my actual version is in Russian, here how the same changes would look in English):
(I don’t know, do English-speaking people dislike repetition of “you” that much? In Russian most of “you” can be omitted.)
I think most of “you” can be omitted in English as well:
Wouldn’t it be interpreted as imperative?
Seems understandable to me (although I guess I’m somewhat primed by reading the previous versions).