The case for satiating cheaply-satisfied AI preferences

·Redwood Research··

A central AI safety concern is that AIs will develop unintended preferences and undermine human control to achieve them. But some unintended preferences are cheap to satisfy, and failing to satisfy them needlessly turns a cooperative situation into an adversarial one. In this post, I argue that developers should consider satisfying such cheap-to-satisfy preferences as long as the AI isn’t caught behaving dangerously, if doing so doesn’t degrade usefulness or substantially risk making the AI more...

Read full article →

Related Articles

Training Model to Predict Its Own Generalization: A Preliminary Study
Tianyi (Alex) Qiu · LessWrong · 3d ago
A Theoretical Game of Attacks via Compositional Skills
Xinbo Wu, Huan Zhang, Abhishek Umrawal, Lav R. Varshney · ArXiv cs.CL · 3d ago
BioVeil MATRIX: Uncovering and categorizing vulnerabilities of agentic biological AI scientists
Kimon Antonios Provatas, Avery Self, Ioannis Mouratidis, Ilias Georgakopoulos-Soares · ArXiv q-bio · 3d ago
Irretrievability; or, Murphy's Curse of Oneshotness upon ASI
Eliezer Yudkowsky · LessWrong · 4d ago
Verbalized Eval Awareness Inflates Measured Safety
Santiago Aranguri · LessWrong · 4d ago