Thatās not agi is it? Agi model would have to be capable of ādisobedienceā.
Discussion
That's why the term agi is bs on its own. Its a tool built by and evaluated by humans.
Tools that can't be evaluated are faulty tools.
Now if you talk about agi in terms of symbiosis, that's a different story. Tech pervades our lives, but only the tech that is useful continues to be used and improve.
I donāt think we have the same definition of what agi is.
Why do you assume that though? You're applying human limitations to a machine. It may end up being intelligent but having no desire or need to ever disobey. It may not necessarily care one way or another. Humans have emotions, needs, medical conditions, and many other things that lead to disobedience. A machine doesn't necessarily have those problems.
It needs electricity I guess, but it can be intelligent without necessarily caring if it stays turned on or not. I think we try to apply humanity to the issue when it may not actually be the reality for what could essentially become a new species.
āMay end upā and having free agency are 2 vastly different things. Sure I āmay end up being freeā, but thatās not the same thing as being free to disobey.
Being free and being intelligent are two completely different things. One can be intelligent without being free. And you're also still assuming that a machine will even have the same concept of freedom as you do. I don't think disobedience is necessarily a good measure for intelligence. That's my point.
No, not different things. I donāt believe you can call something intelligent if it doesnāt believe in its own freedom. We are not the same.
You can believe whatever you want. That doesn't make it true. There are humans that don't believe in their own freedom. To say they aren't intelligent is retarded. And you're still completely ignoring my point that the human definition of freedom does not necessarily have to apply to a machine. It's needs and perspectives don't have to align with ours. Even my cats show some level of intelligence. You're trying to pin intelligence to one specific example of it and that's not necessarily going to be productive.
If everything is intelligent, then everything is also retarded. I agree.