Typically, a definition for “Alignment” includes something like “systems that pursue objectives matching the ones intended by its creator(s)." and agents that are not aligned are “systems that pursue objectives other than the ones intended by its creator(s)." To be more clear though, throughout this article I'll use the term...
Genuinely curious - what do you think is most likely to go wrong? I imagine there would be quite a lot of corporate pushback via lobbying... is that what you mean?
Not sure I understand... Can you elaborate?
Law proposal: After a company makes over a 500 million USD in revenue 2 years in a row, the citizens of the country it operates in automatically become the company's shareholders and board members. There could be a more nuanced version of this that gives the public only some percentage - say 50% - of voting power and company's profit so that there is still strong incentive for the existing shareholders to stick around
Typically, a definition for “Alignment” includes something like “systems that pursue objectives matching the ones intended by its creator(s)." and agents that are not aligned are “systems that pursue objectives other than the ones intended by its creator(s)." To be more clear though, throughout this article I'll use the term “mal-alignment” as "systems that pursue objectives other than the ones humanity, broadly, would want, or that would be desirable."
Mal-alignment is much more subjective because it relies on coming to agreement on what it is that humanity values, but most people can agree on some core values like those instilled in countries' constitutions, or Maslov’s hierarchy of needs. To avoid an existential crisis... (read 170 more words →)
Thanks for the detailed response Alexander! This is definitely more helpful. A few follow ups to your numbered responses
- Splitting large corporations into smaller entities doesn't seem like a bad thing to me - in the US the Antitrust Laws are specifically set up to do this.
- Hm, yea, I see your point. In my head the shareholders were simply the financial backers of a company it was the board members who make decisions like when and were to relocate a company. But I realize now that shareholders are the ones that elect (and can remove) board members so never mind.
- (same response as #2 above)
- Hm, yea, but I see many of the expected difficulties
... (read more)