A catgirl is a pretty girl that is overall human with the exception of cat ears and a tail. Sometimes they have paws (although maybe too experimental for some researchers).
To resolve YES, the ears and tail have to be functional and continous with the body, not merely accessories. This will likely only occur with significant advancements in biotech, possibly through advanced AI:
1,000
3.00https://youtu.be/41SUp-TRVlg?t=4035&si=VhP1iFiqnwEzT4Se
Eliezer:
[...] being nowhere near the top of that food chain, I guess in my humility, amazing as it may sound my humility that is actually greater than the humility of other people in this field, I know that I can be fooled. I know that if you build an AI and you keep on making it smarter until I start voting its stuff up, it will find out how to fool me. I don’t think I can’t be fooled. I watch other people be fooled by stuff that would not fool me. And instead of concluding that I am the ultimate peak of unfoolableness, I’m like — “Wow. I bet I am just like them and I don’t realize it.”
It would be very funny if the "flaw in the verifier" in Yudkowsky's case ends up being cat girls.
Like - for purposes of 'Dignity' - he very seriously attempts to run an OpenAI "superalignment" project by getting a Chinese-Room Black-Box of researchers and AI assistants to feed him alignment proposals and iterates on hitting "thumbs up" or "thumbs down" - and the final resulting proposal ends up being something called "Fun-Theory Maxxxing Super-Duper Extra-Strong Big Hunky Alignment" and prominently features cat girls and flame decals and in the bottom corner of each page of the technical report there's a little doodle that does a flip-book animation of a cute girl bouncing.
@MartinRandall That market says “The ears do not have to be biological, they can also be mechanical.”
This one states that the ears have to be physically attached and “continuous” with the body.