I'm aware of good arguments that this scenario isn't inevitable, but it still seems frighteningly likely even if we solve technical alignment.

TL;DR:

If we solve alignment, it will probably be used to create AGI that follows human orders.
If takeoff is slow-ish, a pivotal act (preventing more AGIs from being developed) will be difficult.
If no pivotal act is performed, RSI-capable AGI proliferates. This creates an n-way non-iterated Prisoner's Dilemma where the first to attack, wins.
Disaster results.

The first AGIs will probably be aligned to take orders

People in charge of AGI projects like power. And by definition, they like their values somewhat better than the aggregate values of all of humanity. It also seems like there's a pretty strong argument that Instruction-following AGI is easier than value aligned AGI. In the slow-ish takeoff we expect, this alignment target seems to allow for error-correcting alignment [...]

---

Outline:

(00:43) The first AGIs will probably be aligned to take orders

(01:27) The first AGI probably wont perform a pivotal act

(02:30) So RSI-capable AGI may proliferate until a disaster occurs

(03:51) Counterarguments

The original text contained 1 footnote which was omitted from this narration.

---

First published:
August 23rd, 2024

Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/kLpFvEBisPagBLTtM/if-we-solve-alignment-do-we-die-anyway-1

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

“If we solve alignment, do we die anyway? ” by Seth Herd

LessWrong (30+ Karma)