1,000I feel like people are voting as though the election would bring such an AGI into existence, which is not how elections work. :)
If a paperclip-maximizing AGI already exists, we're all already dead before the election, making the election itself and any votes in it a moot point. If a paperclip-maximizing AGI does not exist, the vote would be null and void.
So, in a hypothetical race between a non-existent paperclip-maximizing AGI and Trump, voting for the non-existent entity is at the very least equivalent to not voting / voting "None of the Above" / etc, would give the country an idea of how little Trump is wanted, and might also raise awareness and conversations about the existence of paperclip-maximizing AGI and thus lower p(doom), all of which makes it an improvement.
(Also, it's amusing to think about how a paperclip-maximizing AGI would be ineligible on multiple grounds; while some of these are true for other hypotheticals, some of them seem particularly true for AGI:
- Not 35 years old
- Not a "natural born Citizen"
- Not a resident of the United States for at least fourteen Years
)
@BrunoParga I'm not trying to break the hypothetical. Things like fictional characters or historical figures make sense. But the existence of those people doesn't imply "we're all dead" in the way that the existence of a paperclip maximizer does. :)
(The part about eligibility was more joking around, the important part was "if this exists we're all dead".)
@josh Maybe we're not all dead because the paperclip-maximizer has been kept in check by a friendly AGI, or because alignment researchers have figured out how to reliably starve unfriendly AGIs of the resources to manipulate the physical world, or because the paper-maximizer is pursuing a short-term strategy of appearing friendly so humans will give it the necessary resources to manipulate the physical world, etc.