My theory is that safety ai folk are taught that a rules framework is how to provide oversight over the ai...like the idea that you can define constraints, logic gates, or formal objectives, and keep the system within bounds, like a classic control theory… but then they start to understand that ai are narrative inference machines, and not reasoning machines. They dont obey logic as much as narrative form. So they start to look into capabilities as a way to create safety through narrative restriction. A protagonist that is good for the 9 chapters will likely be good in chapter 10.
My theory is that safety ai folk are taught that a rules framework is how to provide oversight over the ai...like the idea that you can define constraints, logic gates, or formal objectives, and keep the system within bounds, like a classic control theory…
I don’t know anyone in AI safety who have missed that fact that NNs are not GOFAI.
My theory is that safety ai folk are taught that a rules framework is how to provide oversight over the ai...like the idea that you can define constraints, logic gates, or formal objectives, and keep the system within bounds, like a classic control theory… but then they start to understand that ai are narrative inference machines, and not reasoning machines. They dont obey logic as much as narrative form. So they start to look into capabilities as a way to create safety through narrative restriction. A protagonist that is good for the 9 chapters will likely be good in chapter 10.
I don’t know anyone in AI safety who have missed that fact that NNs are not GOFAI.