currentscurrents t1_jbn0sbf wrote on March 10, 2023 at 5:13 AM

Reply to comment by czl in [D] chatGPT and AI ethics by [deleted]

What would a better ethics system even mean?

In order to say one ethics system is better than another, you would have to look at its impact on the world and decide whether the outcomes are good or bad. But "good and bad" are ethical concepts themselves, so you've just shifted the problem up to meta-ethics.

It's the is-ought problem. Intelligence is solidly on the side of "is" - it figures out how to solve problems to accomplish its goals. Ethics is about how you set those goals, and it's on the "ought" side of the fence.

WikiSummarizerBot t1_jbn0th4 wrote on March 10, 2023 at 5:14 AM

Is–ought problem

>The is–ought problem, as articulated by the Scottish philosopher and historian David Hume, arises when one makes claims about what ought to be that are based solely on statements about what is. Hume found that there seems to be a significant difference between descriptive or positive statements (about what is) and prescriptive or normative statements (about what ought to be), and that it is not obvious how one can coherently move from descriptive statements to prescriptive ones.

^([ )^(F.A.Q)^( | )^(Opt Out)^( | )^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)^( | )^(GitHub)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)

czl t1_jbn6rys wrote on March 10, 2023 at 6:18 AM

> What would a better ethics system even mean?

You ask a good question. Much like language fosters communication to my non expert eyes ethics is an ideology with a protocol for behavior the purpose of which is to foster “group cohesion” / cooperation / trust / lower social transaction costs / reduction of exploitation / …

A langauge is best when communication is best yet there are many languages possible and what is most important that your language matches the language of your group and that when langauge changes that the changes are gradual so that langauge continues to be useful. I belive similar principles apply to ethics for the purpose ethics service.

Thus a better ethical system will be one that serves its purpose better. Machines can help us discover improvements to ethics because using machines we can simulate payoffs for various behavior strategies and these simulations can teach us valuable lessons. For example the discovery of:

>> Tit-for-tat has been very successfully used as a strategy for the iterated prisoner's dilemma. The strategy was first introduced by Anatol Rapoport in Robert Axelrod's two tournaments,[2] held around 1980. Notably, it was (on both occasions) both the simplest strategy and the most successful in direct competition.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tit_for_tat

Moreover since machines enable all to study ethcial protocols all can see which strategies work and which do not work and what the consequences are so there is the rational convergence towards what works as tends to happen in science vs natural fragmentation and polarization as trends to happen with non-science based beliefs (and their ethical systems).

I expect experts of ethics to challenge this non expert view so please do not hold back your criticism — but speak as if to a dummy so keep the jargon back and your explanations simple. I am here to be educated. Thank you!

WikiSummarizerBot t1_jbn6sxs wrote on March 10, 2023 at 6:18 AM

Tit for tat

>Tit for tat is an English saying meaning "equivalent retaliation". It developed from "tip for tap", first recorded in 1558. It is also a highly effective strategy in game theory. An agent using this strategy will first cooperate, then subsequently replicate an opponent's previous action.

^([ )^(F.A.Q)^( | )^(Opt Out)^( | )^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)^( | )^(GitHub)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)