Separating the things that have power (currently humans, soon AIs) from the things that have moral worth that things in the world happen for (hopefully always including humans) is inherently dicey
The entire AI space is obsessed with Benthamite utilitarianism, while missing the fact that his successor Mill was much more right about human morality.
If you had to pick one preference ranking over philosophers to steer the AI transition, it should be Mill > Bentham
Is opposing AI takeover speciesist? Which successors are good? What perspectives is the AI space missing that make it confused about these questions?
New post out, that completes my series on alignment & succession. Thread -->
I think it's possible to make a lot of progress toward models that are both open and safe!
The former will become more important to avoid centralization & spread benefits, and the second will become more important as *gestures at state of things*