Countering Superintelligence Misinformation

Superintelligence is a potential type of future artificial intelligence (AI) that is significantly more intelligent than humans in all major respects. If built, superintelligence could be a transformative event, with potential consequences that are massively beneficial or catastrophic. Meanwhile, the prospect of superintelligence is the subject of major ongoing debate, which includes a significant amount of misinformation. Superintelligence misinformation is potentially dangerous, ultimately leading bad decisions by the would-be developers of superintelligence and those who influence them. This paper surveys strategies to counter superintelligence misinformation. Two types of strategies are examined: strategies to prevent the spread of superintelligence misinformation and strategies to correct it after it has spread. In general, misinformation can be difficult to correct, suggesting a high value of strategies to prevent it. This paper is the first extended study of superintelligence misinformation. It draws heavily on the study of misinformation in psychology, political science, and related fields, especially misinformation about global warming. The strategies proposed can be applied to lay public attention to superintelligence, AI education programs, and efforts to build expert consensus.

[1]  Mihail C. Roco,et al.  Nanoethics: The Ethical and Social Implications of Nanotechnology , 2007 .

[2]  Stephen M. Omohundro,et al.  The Basic AI Drives , 2008, AGI.

[3]  S. Baum.  A Survey of Artificial General Intelligence Projects for Ethics, Risk, and Policy , 2017 .

[4]  N. Oreskes.  The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change , 2004, Science.

[5]  John Danaher,et al.  Why AI Doomsayers are Like Sceptical Theists and Why it Matters , 2015, Minds and Machines.

[6]  Ullrich K. H. Ecker,et al.  Misinformation and Its Correction , 2012, Psychological science in the public interest : a journal of the American Psychological Society.

[7]  D. Lindenmayer.  Merchants of Doubt. How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming , 2012 .

[8]  Anthony Leiserowitz,et al.  Meteorologists' Views About Global Warming: A Survey of American Meteorological Society Professional Members , 2014 .

[9]  Paul Slovic,et al.  Motivated numeracy and enlightened self-government , 2017, Behavioural Public Policy.

[10]  Stephen A. Rains,et al.  A Meta-Analysis of Research on Inoculation Theory , 2010 .

[11]  A. Leiserowitz,et al.  Support for climate policy and societal action are linked to perceptions about scientific agreement , 2011 .

[12]  Nick Bostrom,et al.  Existential Risk Prevention as Global Priority , 2013 .

[13]  Roman V Yampolskiy,et al.  Safety Engineering for Artificial General Intelligence , 2012, Topoi.

[14]  Roman V. Yampolskiy,et al.  Modeling and Interpreting Expert Disagreement About Artificial Superintelligence , 2017, Informatica.

[15]  Ben Goertzel,et al.  Infusing Advanced AGIs with Human-Like Value Systems , 2016, Journal of Ethics and Emerging Technologies.

[16]  Addressing Behaviors That Lead to Sharing Fake News , 2018 .

[17]  R. Penrose,et al.  How Long Until Human-Level AI ? Results from an Expert Assessment , 2011 .

[18]  G. Marshall.  Don't Even Think About It: Why Our Brains Are Wired to Ignore Climate Change , 2014 .

[19]  D. Bedford.  Please Scroll down for Article Journal of Geography Agnotology as a Teaching Tool: Learning Climate Science by Studying Misinformation Agnotology as a Teaching Tool: Learning Climate Science by Studying Misinformation , 2022 .

[20]  Deanna Kuhn,et al.  Dialogic Argumentation as a Vehicle for Developing Young Adolescents’ Thinking , 2011, Psychological science.

[21]  Patricia Kowalski,et al.  The Effect of Refuting Misconceptions in the Introductory Psychology Class , 2009 .

[22]  Ben Goertzel,et al.  Artificial General Intelligence: Concept, State of the Art, and Future Prospects , 2009, J. Artif. Gen. Intell..

[23]  A. McCright,et al.  Perceived scientific agreement and support for government action on climate change in the USA , 2013, Climatic Change.

[24]  Brendan Nyhan,et al.  The Effect of Fact-Checking on Elites: A Field Experiment on U.S. State Legislators , 2015 .

[25]  Seth D. Baum.  Superintelligence Skepticism as a Political Tool , 2018, Inf..

[26]  Gilles E. Gignac,et al.  The pivotal role of perceived scientific consensus in acceptance of science , 2013 .

[27]  D. Kahan,et al.  Cultural cognition of scientific consensus , 2011 .

[28]  Brendan Nyhan,et al.  Displacing Misinformation about Events: An Experimental Test of Causal Corrections , 2015, Journal of Experimental Political Science.

[29]  Stephan Lewandowsky,et al.  Explicit warnings reduce but do not eliminate the continued influence of misinformation , 2010, Memory & cognition.

[30]  A. Wilkes,et al.  Editing Episodic Memory following the Identification of Error , 1988 .

[31]  Natasha Vita-More,et al.  The transhumanist reader : classical and contemporary essays on the science, technology, and philosophy of the human future , 2013 .

[32]  John Salvatier,et al.  When Will AI Exceed Human Performance? Evidence from AI Experts , 2017, ArXiv.

[33]  Ahti-Veikko Pietarinen.  What Your Computer Still Can't Know: A Refutation of Bringsjord's Refutation of Searle's Refutation of Bostrom and Floridi , 2016, Robophilosophy/TRANSOR.

[34]  Hollyn M. Johnson,et al.  Sources of the continued influence effect: When misinformation in memory affects later inferences. , 1994 .

[35]  Lillian Hsu,et al.  Bridging the partisan divide: Self-affirmation reduces ideological closed-mindedness and inflexibility in negotiation. , 2007, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[36]  Ullrich K. H. Ecker,et al.  Correcting misinformation—A challenge for education and cognitive science. , 2014 .

[37]  Robert K. Logan.  Can Computers Become Conscious, an Essential Condition for the Singularity? , 2017, Inf..

[38]  Eun-Hee Kim,et al.  Greenwash vs. Brownwash: Exaggeration and Undue Modesty in Corporate Sustainability Disclosure , 2014, Organ. Sci..

[39]  Fighting Fake News and Post-Truth Politics with Behavioral Science: The Pro-Truth Pledge , 2018 .

[40]  Nick Bostrom,et al.  Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies , 2014 .

[41]  P. Grandjean.  Only One Chance: How Environmental Pollution Impairs Brain Development -- and How to Protect the Brains of the Next Generation , 2013 .

[42]  M. Boykoff,et al.  Balance as bias: global warming and the US prestige press☆ , 2004 .

[43]  Olle Häggström,et al.  Here Be Dragons: Science, Technology and the Future of Humanity , 2016 .

[44]  Brendan Nyhan,et al.  Why the "Death Panel" Myth Wouldn't Die: Misinformation in the Health Care Reform Debate , 2010 .

[45]  Barbara J. Guzzetti,et al.  Promoting conceptual change in science: A comparative meta-analysis of instructional interventions from reading education and science education , 1993 .

[46]  Seth D. Baum,et al.  On the promotion of safe and socially beneficial artificial intelligence , 2017, AI & SOCIETY.

[47]  P. Doran,et al.  Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change , 2009 .

[48]  Denise C. Park,et al.  How warnings about false claims become recommendations , 2005 .

[49]  Ullrich K. H. Ecker,et al.  Neutralizing misinformation through inoculation: Exposing misleading argumentation techniques reduces their influence , 2017, PloS one.

[50]  Ullrich K. H. Ecker,et al.  Misinformation and How to Correct It , 2015 .

[51]  Nick Bostrom,et al.  Future Progress in Artificial Intelligence: A Survey of Expert Opinion , 2013, PT-AI.

[53]  D. Chalmers.  The Singularity: a Philosophical Analysis , 2010 .

[54]  A. Leiserowitz,et al.  The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change as a Gateway Belief: Experimental Evidence , 2015, PloS one.

[55]  Brendan Nyhan,et al.  Beliefs Don't Always Persevere: How Political Figures Are Punished When Positive Information about Them Is Discredited , 2013 .

[56]  H. Doughty.  Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress , 2019 .