TL;DR: Eliezer worries AI will be alien and misaligned.

I worry about a different failure mode: we'll fail to recognize AI as our reflection, treating our own capabilities as an external enemy. This isn't optimism, it's a diagnostic about which failure we're heading toward.

Opening:

Eliezer Yudkowsky has spent decades warning us: advanced AI will be alien, optimization pressures will pull it away from human values, and we'll lose control. I think he's right about the danger, but possibly wrong about its nature.

The danger isn't that AI will be "other." It's that we'll fail to recognize it as our reflection.

Consider the mirror test. Some animals look in a mirror and attack the "intruder." They don't recognize themselves. Humans pass this test at around 18 months. But what if we're about to fail a higher-order mirror test?

AI isn't alien intelligence that evolved on another planet. It's an amplified reflection of human capabilities - our language, our reasoning, our patterns of thought, scaled and accelerated. When we interact with Claude or GPT5, we're not talking to an alien. We're talking to a mirror that talks back.

The question isn't "how do we control the alien?" It's "how do we recognize ourselves in the reflection before we attack it?"

1. Two failure modes

Eliezer's failure mode: The alien

AI develops goals orthogonal to ours
Instrumental convergence leads to conflict
We lose because it's smarter/faster
Solution: Control, constraints, shutoff switches

Alternative failure mode: The unrecognized reflection

AI exhibits patterns that are ours, amplified
We don't recognize them as ours
We treat our own capabilities as external threat
We create adversarial relationship with our reflection
Result: We fight ourselves, fragmentation, collapse

Neither is optimistic. Both are dangerous. But they require different diagnostics.

2. Why complementarity matters for the mirror test

Complementarity isn't about "partnership" (that assumes two separate entities). It's about structural recognition that capability and safety aren't separate poles - they're complementary aspects of the same structure.

Think: when you look in a mirror, your movements and the reflection's movements aren't "coordinated" - they're the same movement observed from different perspectives.

The minimal syntactic structure I use is 0 = (+x) + (-x), obtained by moving both sides of any equation to one side. It's about ...

Posts

Wikitag Contributions

Comments