Superintelligence paths dangers strategies pdf download free

How could one achieve a controlled detonation? Get A Copy. Hardcover , pages. More Details Original Title. Other Editions Friend Reviews. To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up. To ask other readers questions about Superintelligence , please sign up. It seems like all the problems arise when we try to create goals--especially the matter of instrumentals goal to acquire resources and create "infrastructure" to carry out final goals.

Ben Pace I am quite unsure what you are imagining when you imply that an AI can have no goals. If the seed AI only wanted to improve itself, that would be it's …more I am quite unsure what you are imagining when you imply that an AI can have no goals. If the seed AI only wanted to improve itself, that would be it's goal.

An AI with no goals does nothing It's just a rock. Maybe you had something else in mind. I do not know if you have reached argument for the following statement, but it is argued that if a super intelligent AI has a goal, that AI's goal tends to entirely shape the future. If you make an super intelligent AI without goals, someone else can come along and make an AI with goals, and unless that person has done a helluva lot of work on deciding on the goals, it is also argued that things will be very very bad.

I am very curious who wrote the brief introduction of this book on this webpage the homepage of this book. In general, who writes introduction of any book on this website? Are they usually a copy from part of the book itself or written by editor from Goodreads? John Park Almost certainly part of the publisher's publicity package. I don't think Goodreads employs any editors.

See 2 questions about Superintelligence…. Lists with This Book. Community Reviews. Showing Average rating 3. Rating details. More filters. Sort order. Start your review of Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies. Feb 05, Manny rated it it was amazing Shelves: science , strongly-recommended , linguistics-and-philosophy , multiverse , science-fiction.

Superintelligence was published in , and it's already had time to become a cult classic. So, with apologies for being late getting to the party, here's my two cents. For people who still haven't heard of it, the book is intended as a serious, hard-headed examination of the risks associated with the likely arrival, in the short- to medium-term future, of machines which are significantly smarter than we are.

Bostrom is well qualified to do this. He runs the Future of Humanity Institute at Oxfor Superintelligence was published in , and it's already had time to become a cult classic. He runs the Future of Humanity Institute at Oxford, where he's also a professor at the philosophy department, he's read a great deal of relevant background, and he knows everyone. So, why don't we assume for now that Bostrom passes the background check and deserves to be taken seriously.

What's he saying? First of all, let's review the reasons why this is a big deal. If machines can get to the point where they're even a little bit smarter than we are, they'll soon be a whole lot smarter than we are. Machines can think much faster than humans our brains are not well optimised for speed ; the differential is at least in the thousands and more likely in the millions.

So, having caught us up, they will rapidly overtake us, since they're living thousands or millions of their years for every one of ours. Of course, you can still, if you want, argue that it's a theoretical extrapolation, it won't happen any time soon, etc. But the evidence suggests the opposite. The list of things machines do roughly as well as humans is now very long, and there are quite a few things, things we humans once prided ourselves on being good at, that they do much better.

More about that shortly. So if we can produce an artificial human-level intelligence, we'll shortly after have an artificial superintelligence. What does "shortly after" mean?

But probably "slow takeoff" will be at most a year or two, and fast takeoff could be seconds. Suddenly, we're sharing our planet with a being who's vastly smarter than we are. Bostrom goes to some trouble to help you understand what "vastly smarter" means. We're not talking Einstein versus a normal person, or even Einstein versus a mentally subnormal person.

We're talking human being versus a mouse. It seems reasonable to assume the superintelligence will quickly learn to do all the things a very smart person can do, including, for starters: formulating and carrying out complex strategic plans; making money in business activities; building machines, including robots and weapons; using language well enough to persuade people to do dumb things; etc etc.

It will also be able to do things that we not only can't do, but haven't even thought of doing. And so we come to the first key question: having produced your superintelligence, how do you keep it under control, given that you're a mouse and it's a human being?

The book examines this in great detail, coming up with any number of bizarre and ingenious schemes. But the bottom line is that no matter how foolproof your scheme might appear to you , there's absolutely no way you can be sure it'll work against an agent who's so much smarter. There's only one possible strategy which might have a chance of working, and that's to design your superintelligence so that it wants to act in your best interests, and has no possibility of circumventing the rules of its construction to change its behavior, build another superintelligence which changes its behavior, etc.

It has to sincerely and honestly want to do what's best for you. Of course, this is Asimov Three Laws territory; and, as Bostrom says, you read Asimov's stories and you see how extremely difficult it is to formulate clear rules which specify what it means to act in people's best interests. So the second key question is: how do you build an agent which of its own accord wants to do "the right thing", or, as Socrates put it two and half thousand years ago, is virtuous?

As Socrates concludes, for example in Meno and Euthyphro , these issues are really quite difficult to understand. Bostrom uses language which is a bit less poetic and a bit more mathematical, but he comes to pretty much the same conclusions.

No one has much idea yet of how to do it. The book reaches this point and gives some closing advice. There are many details, but the bottom line is unsurprising given what's gone before: be very, very careful, because this stuff is incredibly dangerous and we don't know how to address the critical issues. I think some people have problems with Superintelligence due to the fact that Bostrom has a few slightly odd beliefs he's convinced that we can easily colonize the whole universe, and he thinks simulations are just as real as the things they are simulating.

I don't see that these issues really affect the main arguments very much, so don't let them bother you if you don't like them. Also, I'm guessing some other people dislike the style, which is also slightly odd: it's sort of management-speak with a lot of philosophy and AI terminology added, and because it's philosophy there are many weird thought-experiments which often come across as being a bit like science-fiction. Guys, relax. Philosophers have been doing thought-experiments at least since Plato.

It's perfectly normal. You just have to read them in the right way. And so, to conclude, let's look at Plato again remember, all philosophy is no more than footnotes to Plato , and recall the argument from the Theaetetus. Whatever high-falutin' claims it makes, science is only opinions. Good opinions will agree with new facts that turn up later, and bad opinions will not. We've had three and a half years of new facts to look at since Superintelligence was published.

How's its scorecard? Well, I am afraid to say that it's looking depressingly good. Early on in the history of AI, as the book reminds us, people said that a machine which could play grandmaster level chess would be most of the way to being a real intelligent agent. So IBM's team built Deep Blue, which beat Garry Kasparov in , and people immediately said chess wasn't a fair test, you could crack it with brute force.

Go was the real challenge, since it required understanding. In late and mid , Deep Mind's AlphaGo won matches against two of the world's three best Go players. That was also discounted as not a fair test: AlphaGo was trained on millions of moves of top Go matches, so it was just spotting patterns. Then late last year, Alpha Zero learned Go, Chess and Shogi on its own, in a couple of days, using the same general learning method and with no human examples to train from. It played all three games not just better than any human, but better than all previous human-derived software.

Looking at the published games, any strong chess or Go player can see that it has worked out a vast array of complex strategic and tactical principles. It's no longer a question of "does it really understand what it's doing". It obviously understands these very difficult games much better than even the top experts do, after just a few hours of study.

Humanity, I think that was our final warning. Come up with more excuses if you like, but it's not smart. And read Superintelligence. View all 92 comments. Jul 01, Brian Clegg rated it liked it. I challenge any of them to read this book and still say that philosophy is pointless. What Nick Bostrom does is to look at the implications of developing artificial intelligence that goes beyond human abilities in the general sense.

Of course, we already have a sort of AI that goes beyond our abilities in the narrow sense of, say, arithmetic, or playing chess. In the first couple of chapters he examines how this might be possible — and points out that the timescale is very vague.

Even so, it seems entirely feasible that we will have a more than human AI — a superintelligent AI — by the end of the century. What would we ask it to do? How would we motivate it? How would we control it? And, bearing in mind it is more intelligent than us, how would we prevent it taking over the world or subverting the tasks we give it to its own ends?

It is truly fascinating concept, explored in great depth here. This is genuine, practical philosophy. Yet there has been a lot of thought and dare I say it, a lot more readability than you typically get in a textbook, put into the issues in science fiction than is being allowed for, and it would have been worthy of a chapter in its own right. One is that it would be impossible to contain and restrict such an AI. The other dubious assertion was originally made by I. Good, who worked with Alan Turing, and seems to be taken as true without analysis.

I think the trouble with this argument is that my suspicion is that if you got hold of the million most intelligent people on earth, the chances are that none of them could design an ultra-powerful computer at the component level.

View all 12 comments. Preamble: I confess to Roko's Basilisk that I didn't believe superintelligence was much of a threat, and this book didn't really do anything to challenge that prior. Overall View I'm a software engineer with some basic experience in machine learning, and though the results of machine learning have been becoming more impressive and general, I've never really seen where people are coming from when they see strong superintelligence just around the co Preamble: I confess to Roko's Basilisk that I didn't believe superintelligence was much of a threat, and this book didn't really do anything to challenge that prior.

Overall View I'm a software engineer with some basic experience in machine learning, and though the results of machine learning have been becoming more impressive and general, I've never really seen where people are coming from when they see strong superintelligence just around the corner, especially the kind that can recursively improve itself to the point where intelligence vastly increases in the space of a few hours or days.

So I came to this book with a simple question: "Why are so many intelligent people scared of a near-term existential threat from AI, and especially why should I believe that AI takeoff will be incredibly fast? Though in principle I can't think of anything that prevents the formation of some forms of superintelligence, everything I know about software development makes me think that any progress will be slow and gradual, occasionally punctuated with a new trick or two that allows for somewhat faster but still gradual increases in some domains.

So on the whole, I came away from this book with the uncomfortable but unshakeable notion that most of the people cited don't really have much relevant experience in building large-scale software systems. Though Bostrom used much of the language of computer science correctly, any of his extrapolations from very basic, high-level understandings of these concepts seemed frankly oversimplified and unconvincing.

General Rant on Math in Philosophy Ever since I was introduced to utilitarianism in college the naive, Bentham-style utilitarianism at least I've been somewhat concerned about the practice of trying to add more rigor to philosophical arguments by filling them with mathematical formalism. To continue with the example of utilitarianism, in its most basic sense it asks you to consider any action based on a calculation of how much pleasure will result from your action divided by the amount of pain an action will cause, and to act in such a way that you maximize this ratio.

Now it's of course impossible to do this calculation in all but the most trivial cases, even assuming you've somehow managed to define pleasure, pain, and come up with some sort of metric for actually evaluating differences between them. So really the formalism only expresses a very simple relationship between things which are not defined, and based on the process of definition might not be able to be legitimately placed in simple arithmetic or algebraic expressions.

I felt much the same way when I was reading Superintelligence. Especially in his chapter on AI takeoff, Bostrom argued that the amount of improvement in an AI system could be modeled as a ratio of applied optimization power over the recalcitrance of the system, or its architectural unwillingness to accept change. Certainly this is true as far as it goes, but "optimization power" and "recalcitrance" are necessarily at this point dealing with systems that nobody yet knows how to build, or even what they will look like, beyond some hand-wavey high-level descriptions, and so there is no definition one can give that makes any sense unless you've already committed to some ideas of exactly how the system will perform.

Bostrom tries to hedge his bets by presenting some alternatives, but he's clearly committed to the idea of a fast takeoff, and the math-like symbols he's using present only a veneer of formalism, drawing some extremely simple relations between concepts which can't be yet defined in any meaningful way.

This was the example that really made my objections to unjustified philosophy-math snap into sharp focus, but it's just one of many peppered throughout the book, which gives an attempted high-level look at superintelligent systems, but too many of the black boxes on which his argument rested remained black boxes. Unable to convince myself of the majority of his argument since too many of his steps were glossed over, I came away from this book thinking that there had to be a lot more argumentation somewhere, since I couldn't imagine holding this many unsubstantiated "axioms" for something apparently important to him as superintelligence.

And it really is a shame that the book needed to be bogged down with so much unnecessary formalism which had the unpleasant effect of making it feel simultaneously overly verbose and too simplistic , since there were a few good things in here that I came away with.

The sections on value-loading and security were especially good. Like most of the book, I found them overly speculative and too generous in assuming what powers superintelligences would possess, but there is some good strategic stuff in here that could lead toward more general forms of machine intelligence, and avoid some of the overfitting problems common in contemporary machine learning.

Of course, there's also no plan of implementation for this stuff, but it's a cool idea that hopefully penetrates a little further into modern software development. Needless to say I'm not filled with a desire to donate on the basis of an argument I found largely unconvincing, but I do have to commend those involved for actually having an attempt at a plan of implementation in place simultaneous with a call to action.

Conclusion I remain pretty unconvinced of AI as a relatively near-term existential threat, though I think there's some good stuff in here that could use a wider audience. And being more thoughtful and careful with software systems is always a cause I can get behind. I just wish some more of the gaps got filled in, and I could justifiably shake my suspicion that Bostrom doesn't really know that much about the design and implementation of large-scale software systems.

Uncharitable TL;DR View all 23 comments. Dec 03, Riku Sayuj rated it liked it Shelves: creative-enough , brain-bheja-fry , artificial-intelligence , science-neuro , pop-strat , futurescope , better-read-again , pop-science , big-data , science-gen. Imagine a Danger You may say I'm a Dreamer Bostrom is here to imagine a world for us and he has batshit crazy imagination, have to give him that. And hence strategies are required. See what he did there? It is all a lot of fun, to be playing this thought experiment game, but it leaves me a bit confused about what to feel about the book as an intellectual piece of speculation.

I was on the fence between a two-star rating or a four-star rating for much of the reading. Plenty of exciting and grand-sounding ideas are thrown at me… but, truth be told, there are too many - and hardly any are developed. They are just all out there, hanging. As if their nebulosity and sheer abundance should do the job of scaring me enough.

In the end I was reduced to surfing the book for ideas worth developing on my own. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals. Issue Section:. You do not currently have access to this article.

Download all slides. Sign in Don't already have an Oxford Academic account? You could not be signed in. Sign In Forgot password? Werewolf and witch romance books. Snow white and rose red ladybird book. Snow white book and cd. Boss and secretary romance books. Snow white and the seven dwarfs walt disney book. The decline and fall of the roman empire book. Draughts strategy and tactics pdf are these my basoomas i see before me pdf.

Gta 4 lcpdfr download free pc learning through serving second edition pdf. Preview — Superintelligence by Nick Bostrom. There's only one possible strategy which might have a chance of working, and that's to design your superintelligence so that it wants to act in your best interests, and has no possibility of circumventing Superintelligence : paths, dangers, strategies eBook, Superintelligence : paths, dangers, strategies.

It is to these distinctive capabilities that our species owes its dominant position. Nick Bostrom. How do we get from here to there? This chapter explores several conceivable technological paths. We look at artificial intelligence, who What fascinated me is that Bostrom has approached the existential danger of AI from a perspective that, although I am an AI professor, I had never really examined in any detail.

Buy Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies Free delivery on qualified orders. Human civilisation is at stake Financial Times. Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies by Corps In Danger's Path Corps. Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies - Wikipedia. It argues that if machine brains surpass human brains in general intelligence, then this new superintelligence could replace humans as the dominant lifeform on Earth.

The book was published in multiple languages including English, consists of pages and is available in Paperback format.

The main characters of this science, non fiction story are ,. The book has been awarded with , and many others.