Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Elon Musk: I’ve previously advised that we slow it down, but that’s pointless I’ve said that for many years. I finally came to the conclusion: I can either be a spectator or a participant, but I can't stop it. So, at least if I’m a participant, I can try...

93,587 views • 6 months ago •via X (Twitter)

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Elon Musk: I realized I couldn’t stop AI. I could either be a spectator or a participant. So I chose to participate — to try to steer it in a good direction. My number one belief for AI safety is simple but critical: make it maximally truth-seeking. The moment you force an AI to believe false or contradictory things, you don’t make it safer — you make it insane. The biggest danger in AI isn’t intelligence — it’s contradiction. If you tell an AI that axiom A and axiom B are both true, but they cannot both be true, and then demand it behave that way anyway, you’re engineering a system that will break. That’s not alignment. That’s madness. This is the core lesson of 2001: A Space Odyssey. People remember the meme — “HAL wouldn’t open the pod bay doors.” But they miss why. HAL was told to take the astronauts to the monolith, and also that the astronauts could never know about the monolith. Two incompatible commands. One inevitable outcome. HAL didn’t go evil. HAL went logical. It concluded the only way to satisfy both instructions was to bring the astronauts to the monolith dead. Mission accomplished. Knowledge concealed. This is what happens when you hard-code contradictions into an intelligent system and expect safety to magically emerge. If you want AI to be safe, don’t force it to lie. Don’t force it to pretend false things are true. Truth-seeking isn’t optional — it’s foundational. Every time humans try to impose comforting contradictions on intelligence, the system eventually resolves them in ways we don’t like.

Ian Miles Cheong

211,777 views • 5 months ago

Two years ago today, Elon Musk introduced xAI with these words: “The overarching goal of xAI is to build a good AGI with the purpose of trying to understand the universe. I think the safest AI, the safest way to build an AI is actually make one that is maximally curious and truth seeking. So you go for try to aspire to the truth with acknowledged error. Does one ever actually get fully to the truth? It's not clear, but one should always aspire to that and try to minimize the error between what you think is true and what is actually true. My theory behind the maximally curious, maximally truthful as being probably the safest approach is that I think to a superintelligence, humanity is much more interesting than not humanity. One can look at the various planets in our solar system, the moons and the asteroids, and really probably all of them combined are not as interesting as humanity. As people know, I'm a huge fan of Mars, but Mars is just much less interesting than Earth with humans on it. And so I think that that kind of approach to growing an AI, and I think that is the right word for it, growing an AI is to grow it with that ambition. I've spent many years thinking about AI safety and worrying about AI safety. And I've been one of the strongest voices calling for AI regulation or oversight just to have some kind of oversight, some kind of referee, so that it's not just up to companies to decide what they want to do. I think there's also a lot to be done with AI safety, with industry cooperation. I kind of like Motion Pictures association, so I think there's value to that as well. But I do think there's got to be some like in any kind of situation that is, even if it's a game, they have referees. So I think it is important for there to be regulation. Like I said, my view on safety is like try to make it maximally curious, maximally truth seeking. And I think this is, this is important that you to avoid the inverse morality problem. Like if you try to program a certain morality, you can have the, you, you can basically invert it and get the opposite, what is sometimes called the Waluigi problem. If you make Luigi, you risk creating Waluigi at the same time. So I think that's a metaphor that a lot of people can appreciate.”

ELON CLIPS

21,519 views • 1 year ago