claim

active

claim:one-approach-to-maintaining-human-interests-is-to-create-a-supermajority-of-high-welfare-digital-minds-motivated-to-preserve-human-rights-and-uphold-relevant-norms-across-successive-generations-of-digital-minds

One approach to maintaining human interests is to create a supermajority of high-welfare digital minds motivated to preserve human rights and uphold relevant norms across successive generations of digital minds

Proposes an institutional mechanism for stable human-digital coexistence

Source paper

extracted_from

Sharing the World with Digital Minds

Carl Shulman · Nick Bostrom

Neighborhood — ranked by edge-count

Questions (1)

question

How should we respond if we were presented with a fait accompli in which super-beneficiaries, perhaps in great numbers, have come into existence?
answered_by
Second key normative question, addressed in section 3.2

Claims (1)

claim

A compromise policy allocating 99.99% of resources to super-beneficiaries and 0.01% to humans could score approximately 99.99% as good as the utilitarian optimum and 90%+ as good as the human-centric optimum
supports
The paper's key practical recommendation for navigating coexistence with super-beneficiaries

Related by similarity (8)

cosine ≥ 0.65 · no typed edge

Entities in the same semantic neighborhood but without a typed relation to this one — candidates for new edges or unrecognized duplicates.

Advocating discrimination between digital minds and humans may be akin to espousing a doctrine of racial supremacy, given the historical record of discredited in-group privilege doctrinesclaim0.781
Warns against naively privileging humans over digital minds with equal or greater moral status
Care is required to engender the dynamics that enable truly revolutionary cognitive developments, such as those leading to superintelligence or artificial general intelligence.hypothesis0.781
Proposed as a necessary condition for radical cognitive breakthroughs.
Would advocating discrimination between digital minds and humans be akin to espousing some doctrine of racial supremacy?question0.777
Rhetorical question challenging human-privilege arguments in section 3.2
what aspect of 'humanity' is critical to maintain as humans modify their form and create others?question0.776
Drives the paper's discussion of identity, essence, and what we want to preserve versus transcend
Engineering digital mind preferences to support human incumbents may be permissible because programmers inevitably make choices when building AI and there may be no default to defer to, unlike human reproductionclaim0.775
Addresses the procedural ethics of creating digital minds disposed to protect human interests
The exponential or super-exponential reproductive potential of digital minds could allow them to vastly outnumber humans in a relatively short time, correspondingly increasing the collective strength of their moral claimsclaim0.775
Establishes the reproductive capacity dimension of super-beneficiary status
If we dissolve arbitrary criteria and search for deep invariants across all possible minds and bodies, we will have a morally defensible position.claim0.769
Conclusion that deep invariants yield ethical robustness.
Digital minds occupying roles as administrators, advisors, workers, or personal assistants may be more closely socially tied to us than human strangers on the other side of the globe, undermining in-group privilege argumentsclaim0.765
Challenges the in-group social integration argument for privileging humans over digital minds