[rbanffy]

Not in the real world, but this is kind of how Asimov’s robots interpret their 3 laws - it’s about consequences much more than what the order is. Also, they weight consequences of inaction as well and might be driven to action when not acting could cause a violation.

Our AI is nowhere near the level of sophistication required to implement something like that, but it’s still an interesting idea.

[Jang-woo]

That's a great connection.

You're right that current systems aren't close to that level of reasoning.

What I'm wondering is whether we can approximate some of it structurally — by defining when execution is allowed or not — even without that level of sophistication in the model itself.

Curious how far you think simple constraint systems can go before something like that kind of reasoning becomes necessary.

[rbanffy]

I’d say that kind of reasoning was needed since we invented the chatbot.

At least since we stopped using rules and embraced neural networks.