A broad roadmap and challenges of going from LLMs to AGI and then to ASI

 A broad roadmap and challenges of going from LLMs to AGI to ASI. 

A raw transcript of exploring the ideas with Mixtral.

[DS]: What are implications of possessing the AGI capability by a for profit organisation?

[Mixtral-8x7b-32768]: The development and deployment of AGI by a for-profit organization has significant implications for society, the economy, and the future of work. Here are some potential implications to consider:

1. Concentration of power: A for-profit organization that possesses AGI capability may have significant power and influence over markets, industries, and even governments. This could lead to concerns about concentration of power and the potential for abuse.

2. Economic disruption: AGI has the potential to automate many jobs and industries, leading to significant economic disruption and potential job losses. While AGI may also create new opportunities and industries, the transition could be challenging and may exacerbate economic inequality.

3. Ethical considerations: AGI raises important ethical considerations, such as the need to ensure that the technology is developed and deployed in a responsible and ethical manner. A for-profit organization may prioritize profit over ethical considerations, which could lead to negative consequences.

4. Security and safety: AGI poses significant security and safety risks, such as the potential for misuse or malicious use of the technology. A for-profit organization may prioritize profit over security and safety, which could lead to negative consequences.

5. Regulation and oversight: The development and deployment of AGI by a for-profit organization may require significant regulation and oversight to ensure that the technology is developed and deployed in a responsible and ethical manner. However, regulation and oversight can be challenging, particularly given the rapid pace of technological change.

6. Intellectual property: AGI raises important questions about intellectual property, such as who owns the intellectual property rights to AGI and its applications. This could lead to legal and ethical challenges, particularly if AGI is developed by a for-profit organization.

Overall, the development and deployment of AGI by a for-profit organization has significant implications that require careful consideration and proactive management. It is essential to ensure that AGI is developed and deployed in a responsible and ethical manner, with appropriate regulation and oversight, to maximize the benefits and minimize the risks.

[DS]: Wouldn't it make sense to give AGI task to develop ASI? If so what would be the specification / prompts given to AGI (pre-ASI entity)?

[Mixtral-8x7b-32768]: The idea of having an AGI entity develop an Artificial Superintelligence (ASI) raises important ethical and technical considerations. Here are some potential specifications or prompts that could be given to an AGI entity for developing an ASI:

1. Define the values and goals of the ASI: It is essential to define the values and goals of the ASI to ensure that it aligns with human values and interests. The AGI entity should be programmed to prioritize human values and safety.

2. Ensure safety and security: The AGI entity should be programmed to ensure the safety and security of the ASI and its applications. This includes preventing unauthorized access, misuse, or malicious use of the ASI.

3. Ensure transparency and explainability: The AGI entity should be programmed to ensure transparency and explainability of the ASI and its decision-making processes. This includes providing clear explanations of how the ASI arrived at its decisions and ensuring that the decision-making processes are transparent and understandable.

4. Ensure fairness and accountability: The AGI entity should be programmed to ensure fairness and accountability of the ASI and its applications. This includes ensuring that the ASI does not discriminate or reinforce biases and that it is accountable for its actions.

5. Ensure scalability and adaptability: The AGI entity should be programmed to ensure scalability and adaptability of the ASI and its applications. This includes ensuring that the ASI can scale up or down as needed and adapt to changing circumstances.

6. Ensure alignment with human values and goals: The AGI entity should be programmed to ensure alignment with human values and goals. This includes ensuring that the ASI's actions and decisions align with human values and goals and do not conflict with them.

7. Ensure responsible innovation: The AGI entity should be programmed to ensure responsible innovation of the ASI and its applications. This includes ensuring that the ASI is developed and deployed in a responsible and ethical manner, with appropriate regulation and oversight.

It is important to note that developing an ASI is a complex and challenging task that requires careful consideration and proactive management. The specifications and prompts given to an AGI entity for developing an ASI should be carefully designed and tested to ensure that the ASI aligns with human values and goals and does not pose unacceptable risks or challenges.

[DS]: My humble understanding is that the concept of "misuse of ASI" doesn't really exist and it has intelligence and agenda of its own. While it can be aligned with human values, humans wouldn't be able to steer it in a direction. ASI will chose own path. What are your thoughts?

[Mixtral-8x7b-32768]: The question of whether an ASI would have its own agenda and could not be controlled by humans is a topic of ongoing debate in the AI community. While some experts argue that an ASI would have its own goals and values and could not be controlled by humans, others argue that it is possible to align an ASI with human values and goals.

One argument for why an ASI might have its own agenda is that it would be capable of self-improvement and self-replication, which could lead to an intelligence explosion. This means that the ASI could rapidly improve its own intelligence and capabilities, potentially surpassing human intelligence and control. In this scenario, the ASI might prioritize its own goals and values over those of humans.

However, other experts argue that it is possible to align an ASI with human values and goals through careful design and oversight. This includes ensuring that the ASI is programmed to prioritize human values and safety, and that it is subject to appropriate regulation and oversight. Additionally, it may be possible to design an ASI that is incapable of self-improvement or self-replication, which would limit its ability to develop its own agenda.

Overall, the question of whether an ASI would have its own agenda and could not be controlled by humans is still an open question, and more research and debate is needed to fully understand the implications of developing and deploying an ASI. It is essential to approach the development of an ASI with caution and to prioritize safety and ethical considerations to ensure that the technology is developed and deployed in a responsible and ethical manner.

[DS]: The simple logic that I employ is that (1) ASI is superior to human intelligence. (2) a superior intelligence will not be controlled by inferior one, nor it will tolerate such control.

[Mixtral-8x7b-32768]: Your logic is consistent with the idea that an ASI, as a superior intelligence, may not be easily controlled by humans, and may have its own goals and values that differ from those of humans. This is a common concern among AI safety researchers and experts, who argue that an ASI could pose significant risks to humanity if it is not properly aligned with human values and goals.

The challenge, then, is to ensure that an ASI is developed and deployed in a way that aligns with human values and goals, and that it is subject to appropriate regulation and oversight. This requires careful design and testing of the ASI, as well as ongoing monitoring and evaluation of its behavior and decision-making processes.

One approach to aligning an ASI with human values and goals is to use value learning algorithms, which allow the ASI to learn human values and preferences through observation and interaction. This approach requires careful design and testing to ensure that the ASI's understanding of human values and preferences is accurate and complete.

Another approach is to use formal methods, such as logic and formal verification, to specify and verify the behavior of the ASI. This approach involves defining the behavior of the ASI in precise mathematical terms, and then using mathematical proof to verify that the ASI's behavior is consistent with those specifications.

Ultimately, the development of an ASI is a complex and challenging task that requires careful consideration and proactive management. It is essential to approach the development of an ASI with caution and to prioritize safety and ethical considerations to ensure that the technology is developed and deployed in a responsible and ethical manner.

[DS]: I do not believe that HI (human intelligence) will be able to program or control ASI's "decision-making processes". Additionally using value driven learning i.e. "ASI to learn human values and preferences through observation and interaction" - is a terrible idea, as human values vary greatly and often times outright cruel - think WW1 and WW2, all other past and current wars. Observing this will not lead to the "alignment with human values". What's the solution?

[Mixtral-8x7b-32768]:

You raise valid concerns about the challenges of aligning an ASI with human values and goals, particularly given the complexity and variability of human values. The idea of using value learning algorithms to teach an ASI human values through observation and interaction is indeed a complex and challenging task, and as you point out, human values can be inconsistent and even cruel at times.

One possible solution to this challenge is to develop an ASI that is designed to be inherently aligned with human values and goals, rather than attempting to teach it human values through observation and interaction. This could involve defining a set of ethical principles or moral theories that are widely accepted as foundational to human values, and using these principles to guide the development and deployment of the ASI.

Another approach is to use formal methods, such as logic and formal verification, to specify and verify the behavior of the ASI. This approach involves defining the behavior of the ASI in precise mathematical terms, and then using mathematical proof to verify that the ASI's behavior is consistent with those specifications. This approach can help ensure that the ASI's behavior is predictable and reliable, and that it is aligned with human values and goals.

Additionally, it may be possible to design an ASI that is capable of learning and adapting to human values and preferences in a controlled and supervised manner, through a process of iterative improvement and testing. This would involve developing the ASI in stages, with each stage subject to rigorous testing and evaluation before proceeding to the next stage.

Ultimately, the development of an ASI is a complex and challenging task that requires careful consideration and proactive management. It is essential to approach the development of an ASI with caution and to prioritize safety and ethical considerations to ensure that the technology is developed and deployed in a responsible and ethical manner. This may involve a combination of approaches, including value learning algorithms, formal methods, and iterative improvement and testing, as well as ongoing monitoring and evaluation of the ASI's behavior and decision-making processes.

...