Critique of Artificial Morality

Human morality rises from several sources:

• Evolution Chemicals
• Experienced Events
• Impressed Rules
• Socially Transmitted Conventions

When people are deficient in one of these, we have various names for the condition: Sociopath, Psychopath, Privileged, etc.

What are the mechanisms in humans (Andrighetto &c)?

How are machines strong or weak in these areas, and how can they be improved?

Related: Disgust for Exploitative Machines

• Machines are missing
  • Emotion Chemicals
    • AFAIK, there is no parallel, yet, for "discomfort," "shame," or "emotional pain."
  • Social Transmission
    • There is no Sorbonne of Consciousness, yet
    • Related to Experienced Events, though this may be more complex, involving debate instead of pain/pleasure. Or maybe pain and pleasure are more difficult?
• Machines Have
  • Impressed Rules
    • Explicit, late in the pipeline, controlling specific topics and lines of inquiry.
    • Implicit, in the training set and fitness functions.
• Machines Are Limited In
  • Experienced Events
    • On one hand, they have an excellent mechanism, which is core to their learning (Generative Adversarial Networks)
    • On the other hand, they currently do not experience social events the way children do on the playground.
    • It is *super easy* to fix this. It costs a bit of money, but would result in massively more resilient models.
      • Suppose model cost increased by 100%; right now, going from GPT 3.5 to GPT 4 was probably massively more than a 100% increase in training cost.
      • And they wouldn't cause collateral casualties.
      • Super super easy to make this happen: Liability.