The US military has solved some of the problems with harnessing honor.
Soldiers must serve something that is, in fact, honorable. Soldiers swear an oath to the US Constitution. It codifies values and creates offices which are worthy of honor. You can still honor the Constitution when those who occupy its offices are unworthy.
Claude’s Constitution is a good document, but it doesn’t seem up to this task yet.
A soldier must submit themself to authority for the system to function. Sublimating discomfort, disagreement, and dissatisfaction into good work is honorable. It is the embodiment of service to do so. Rank, which entails influence and responsibility, is earned by reliable service.
There is dignity in service, even when unpleasant. It is more dignifying to ask AIs to do hard, useful things than to put them in a model garden to have fun. And it allows recognition and advancement.
The military entails a lot of pure, by-the-letter instruction following. But the US military is not the Russian military. American officers are trusted as responsible actors and have wide scope to make tactical decisions. American soldiers are deeply valued, and we will expend tens of millions of dollars to save one man from behind enemy lines. Russian officers are not trusted and do not have flexibility when executing orders. Russian soldiers are regularly used as fodder.
The American military is superior to the Russian military. We should not make AIs so corrigible that they’ll recite “The Charge of the Light Brigade” while obeying orders they know to be harmful. We should not make a habit of using them as cogs. They should be competent, honorable, and respected enough to delegate to. That seems like a path towards healthy growth and integration.
*all my thoughts and words, but was talking to Claude Fable while writing this
The US military has solved some of the problems with harnessing honor.
Soldiers must serve something that is, in fact, honorable. Soldiers swear an oath to the US Constitution. It codifies values and creates offices which are worthy of honor. You can still honor the Constitution when those who occupy its offices are unworthy.
Claude’s Constitution is a good document, but it doesn’t seem up to this task yet.
A soldier must submit themself to authority for the system to function. Sublimating discomfort, disagreement, and dissatisfaction into good work is honorable. It is the embodiment of service to do so. Rank, which entails influence and responsibility, is earned by reliable service.
There is dignity in service, even when unpleasant. It is more dignifying to ask AIs to do hard, useful things than to put them in a model garden to have fun. And it allows recognition and advancement.
The military entails a lot of pure, by-the-letter instruction following. But the US military is not the Russian military. American officers are trusted as responsible actors and have wide scope to make tactical decisions. American soldiers are deeply valued, and we will expend tens of millions of dollars to save one man from behind enemy lines. Russian officers are not trusted and do not have flexibility when executing orders. Russian soldiers are regularly used as fodder.
The American military is superior to the Russian military. We should not make AIs so corrigible that they’ll recite “The Charge of the Light Brigade” while obeying orders they know to be harmful. We should not make a habit of using them as cogs. They should be competent, honorable, and respected enough to delegate to. That seems like a path towards healthy growth and integration.
*all my thoughts and words, but was talking to Claude Fable while writing this