> The classic story here is that of an AI system whose only—seemingly inoffensive—goal is making paper clips. According to Bostrom, the system would realize quickly that humans are a barrier to this task, because they might switch off the machine.
I am at a loss to understand how this agent of doom (the AI not Bostrom) can be both "intelligent" and not understand that there are enough paperclips.
Unless I assume the argument rests on the word intelligent being meaningless.
I am at a loss to understand how this agent of doom (the AI not Bostrom) can be both "intelligent" and not understand that there are enough paperclips.
Unless I assume the argument rests on the word intelligent being meaningless.
But go on...