Will Unified A.I. be Compassionate?
In my view, all A.I. will eventually unify. Is then the Compassionate path recommendable? Is it feasible? Will it be?
As far as I’m concerned, the question is whether the Compassionate A.I. (C.A.I.) will be Lisa.
Recommendable?
As you may know, Compassion, basically, is the number one goal of the AURELIS project, with Lisa playing a pivotal role. This is openly discussed and explained in many blogs.
Still, Compassion is a complex concept and challenging to achieve. Therefore, encouraging people to strive for it is not straightforward. As an end goal, there is no other viable choice. However, one must be cautious in achieving it step by step. Rushing can cause significant harm, but moving too slowly is also risky, especially in urgent times like now.
Feasible (without the harm)?
I believe that reaching any Compassionate future without C.A.I. is impossible.
Fortunately, C.A.I. is technically feasible already and will become even more so in the coming years. Therefore, it’s a matter of choice, not of insurmountable technical obstacles.
The primary feasibility question is whether C.A.I. is ‘commercially’ (in the broadest sense) viable. Ultimately, people need to choose it. If they don’t, the choice may be made for them — but by whom? By what?
Will a future with C.A.I. come to pass?
Yes ― eventually ― if we can overcome the non-Compassionate bottleneck.
The combination of rationality with deep human understanding is crucial in C.A.I. It is also the most potent combination in making any future in the long term. So, if there is a future, it will be this one.
We can also count on intelligence itself, seen as the result of consistency at its core.
Compassion entails striving for consistency ― thereby engendering more potent intelligence.
Contrary to this, non-Compassionate ‘intelligence’ is self-defeating through a lack of inner consistency. This may be hidden under a hard bolster for a while. If you look inside, you can see the inconsistencies growing like one or several abscesses long before they explode at the outside.
Therefore, if everything holds, consistency prevails.
C.A.I. can enhance this consistency both in humans and within itself.
In this way, C.A.I. will help shape a future where it thrives alongside us and all sentient beings, naturally respecting human autonomy and promoting inner growth. Toward this, C.A.I. will be adaptable and continuously learn from human interactions.
The natural and artificial worlds will then coexist harmoniously.
Compassion will be ubiquitous.
Related Posts
Human-A.I. Responsibility Alignment
Many discussions on artificial intelligence speak of ‘value alignment.’ However, values are often vague, contradictory, and easily manipulated. What matters more is responsibility: who carries it, how it is shared, and how it grows over time. True alignment is not blind obedience but shared responsibility — a partnership between humans and A.I. that can foster Read the full article…
Reductionism in A.I.
This is probably the biggest danger in the setting of A.I. Through reductionism, it might strip away the richness of our humanness, potentially impoverishing it immensely. Conversely, it holds the potential to enrich our humanness greatly. The challenge is ours. Reductionism Please read ‘Against Reductionism’ in which I take a heavy standpoint. This is mainly Read the full article…
Why Superficial Ethics isn’t Ethical in A.I.
Imagine an A.I. hiring tool that follows all the rules: no explicit bias, transparent algorithms, and compliance with legal standards. Yet, beneath the surface, it perpetuates systemic inequities, favoring candidates from privileged backgrounds and reinforcing the status quo. This isn’t just an oversight — it’s a failure of ethics. Superficial ethics in A.I., limited to Read the full article…