Comment by dmos62
1 hour ago
> The AI is all-powerful and gives you what you ask for, but interprets everything in a super-literal way that you end up regretting.
I like imagining similar discourse when a more basic tool was invented: "A hammer is like a genie, it's all powerful, but, when you hit something with it, it interprets that super-literally, and it hits it."
You forgot the Luddites. No AI-is-a-tool fallacy is complete without the Luddites! Alternatively, one can use the Antichrist.
I'm not aware of this fallacy.
Isn't this a misinterpretation of what everyone in the AI safety space is worried about, though? I think the idea is that having an AI that interprets everything in a super-literal way would probably be catastrophic, but we can't even build that. It would be a nice world-ending problem to have.
It very well could be, I don't really follow those discussions. Honestly, if I were worried about something on Earth intellectually evolving at a suboptimal pace, it would be humans.