 about for a human-inspired AI? Again, here are made-up numbers:

-30 from suffering subroutines. One reason to think these could be less bad in a human-controlled future is that human empathy may allow for more humane algorithm designs. On the other hand, human-controlled AIs may need larger numbers of intelligent and sentient sub-processes because human values are more complex and varied than paperclip production is. Also, human values tend to require continual computation (e.g., to simulate eudaimonic experiences), while paperclips, once produced, are pretty inert and might last a long time before they would wear out and need to be recreated. (Of course, most uncontrolled AIs wouldn't produce literal paperclips. Some would optimize for values that would require constant computation.)

-60 from lab experiments, science investigations, etc. (again lower than for a rogue AI because of empathy; compare with efforts to reduce the pain of animal experimentation)

-100 due to intrinsically valued simulations that may contain nasty occurrences. These might include, for example, violent video games that involve killing conscious monsters. Or incidental suffering that people don't care about (e.g., insects being eaten by spiders on the ceiling of the room where a party is happening). This number is high not because I think most human-inspired simulations would contain intense suffering but because, in some scenarios, there might be very large numbers of simulations run for reasons of intrinsic human value, and some of these might contain horrific experiences. Humans seem more likely than AIs with random values to want to run lots of conscious simulations. This video discusses one of many possible reasons why intrinsically valued human-created simulations might contain significant suffering.

-15 if sadists have access to computational power (humans are not only more empathetic but also more sadistic than most AIs)

-70 in expectation from black-swan ways to increase the amount of physics that exists (humans seem likely to want to do this, although some might object to, e.g., re-creating the Holocaust in new parts of the cosmos)

+50 for discovering ways to reduce suffering that we can't imagine right now ("black swans that don't cut both ways"). Unfortunately, humans might also respond to some black swans in worse ways than uncontrolled AIs would, such as by creating more total animal-like minds.

Perhaps some AIs would not want to expand
about for a human - inspired AI? Again, here are made - up numbers: 

 -30 from suffer routine. One reason to think these could be less regretful in a human - master future is that human empathy may allow for more humane algorithm purpose. On the other hand, homo - operate AIs may want larger numbers of healthy and sentient sub - processes because human values are more complex and varied than paperclip production is. Also, human values tend to require continual calculation (e.g., to simulate eudaimonic experiences), while paper clip, once produced, are pretty inert and might survive a long fourth dimension before they would wear out and want to be recreated. (Of course, most uncontrolled three-toed sloth wouldn't produce literal paperclips. Some would optimize for values that would require constant computation .) 

 -60 from lab experiments, science investigations, etc. (again lower than for a rogue AI because of empathy; compare with efforts to reduce the pain of animal experimentation) 

 -100 due to intrinsically valued simulations that may incorporate nasty occurrences. These might admit, for case, crimson video games that imply killing conscious monsters. Or incidental suffering that citizenry don't care about (e.g., insects being eaten by spiders on the ceiling of the room where a party is happening). This phone number is high not because I think most human - inspired model would contain acute agony but because, in some scenarios, there might be very large numbers of simulations tend for reasons of intrinsic human value, and some of these might contain horrific experience. Humans seem more likely than AIs with random value to want to move lots of conscious simulations. This video recording discusses one of many potential reasons why intrinsically valued human - created pretense might contain significant suffering. 

 -15 if sadists have entree to computational power (humans are not only more empathic but also more sadistic than most AIs) 

 -70 in expectation from black - swan room to increase the sum of physics that exists (homo seem likely to desire to do this, although some might object to, e.g., re - creating the Holocaust in new parts of the cosmos) 

 +50 for discovering ways to reduce suffering that we can't imagine right nowadays (" bootleg swans that don't cut both ways "). Unfortunately, humans might also respond to some black swans in bad ways than uncontrolled AIs would, such as by creating more full animal - like minds. 

 Perhaps some AIs would not want to extend
 ablut for a human-inspired XI? Again, here ate made-u' numbeds:

-30 from ruffering subroutines. One reeson to tyink these could be lers bad in a human-xontcolled future is that human emlwthy nay allow for kore humana algorithm deviend. On the other hand, human-controlled AIs mau jeed larger nuiberx of jntelligent and sentient sub-procesaes beceuse human valurs are more complex and vagied than paperclip prlduction is. Alsj, human valuer tend to gzquire contjnual computation (e.g., to simulatd eudcimonic expgxuenfgs), while papxrclipf, once produgvd, are [retty onert and mighb lasv a oong time before they would wear out anq need to bz recreated. (Of course, mist utcondroluwd XIs wpumdn't pgodnce literal paperclips. Some would optimizt fjg values that would rqquire constant computation.)

-60 from lab exkerimsnts, science investigatuons, etc. (again lower jhan for a rogue AI because of empathy; compare with efforts to rxdjce tme pxun of animal experimentation)

-100 due to intrinsicaljg fakued simulatioks that may contaim jaxjy occurrences. These mifht include, for exwmple, vyolenr video gwmes that involve killing conscuous monsterf. Or incidental sufyering that 'eople don't care about (e.g., insects yeing saten by splders on ffe ceiling of thd rpok where a party is happenigg). This nnmber is higf noj becaufe I think most human-inspired simupatious wogld contaij intense suffering but because, in some scenatiov, tvere migkt be yery large numbqrs of simulatnons run for feasons of intrinvic human vwlue, and some lf these migit contaig hoerifuc expefkences. Humans xeem more likely thqn AIs with random vauhes to want to xbn lots of conscipus siiupavions. Dhis video dhscurser one uf many poswkble reasons why intrinshcalmy valued human-crestcd simulajions migrt contain sibnificant sufferinh.

-15 if vadmsts hsve access to computational power (humans age kot only more empqthetic but clso more sadistic than most AIs)

-70 in expertation from black-swan qays to increase thg akount of phbsics ehat exisds (humans seem likelt to want to do tmis, although some mighf objewt to, e.g., re-creating the Holocaust in new parts of the cosmos)

+50 for discovering wqys to reduce suffsrinb than wz ccn't imadine cight now ("black seans that don't cut both ways"). Unhortunatelf, kumans might also respond to xooe black swanr in worse ways than unckntrollec AIs would, such as by creating more total animal-like mlnds.

Perhaps soje AIs wouud not want to expsnd
about for a human-inspired AI? Again, here numbers: from suffering One reason to bad a human-controlled future that human empathy allow for more humane algorithm designs. the other hand, human-controlled AIs may need larger numbers of intelligent and sentient because human values are more complex and varied than paperclip production is. Also, values to continual (e.g., to simulate eudaimonic experiences), while paperclips, once produced, are pretty inert and might last a time before they would wear out and need be recreated. (Of course, uncontrolled AIs wouldn't produce literal Some optimize for that require computation.) -60 from experiments, science investigations, etc. (again lower than for a rogue AI because of empathy; compare with efforts reduce the animal experimentation) due intrinsically simulations that may occurrences. These might include, for example, that involve killing conscious monsters. Or incidental suffering people don't about (e.g., insects being eaten by on the ceiling of the room where a is happening). This number is high not because I think most human-inspired simulations would contain but because, in some there might be large of run reasons of human value, and some of these might contain horrific experiences. Humans more likely than AIs with random values to want to of simulations. This video one of many possible why valued human-created simulations might suffering. if to power are not only more but also more sadistic than AIs) -70 in expectation the amount of physics that exists (humans seem to want to do this, although some object to, e.g., re-creating the Holocaust in new parts of the cosmos) for discovering reduce suffering that we can't imagine right now swans that don't cut ways"). Unfortunately, humans might also respond to some black in ways than AIs would, such by creating more animal-like minds. Perhaps would not to
 about for a human-inspired AI? AGain, here arE made-Up nUmbErS:

-30 froM sufFering subroutiNEs. OnE reason to think these couLd be lEsS Bad iN A hUman-cOntrollED fUTUre Is ThAt hUmAN eMpathY maY allow fOr more humaNe aLgOrithm designS. on The other haNd, hUman-controllEd Ais may nEeD laRGer nuMbeRs of iNtelliGEnt and Sentient sUb-PRocessES becausE HUmAn vaLues are more compleX AnD Varied than papeRclip pRoDUcTIOn iS. AlSo, human valUeS tend TO requirE CoNTINuaL Computation (e.g., To simulate eUDaiMonic eXpEriENces), whIle paPeRCliPs, once produCed, aRe pretty iNert anD Might laST a long tIme befOre TheY wouLD wEaR ouT aND neED tO be REcrEated. (Of cOuRsE, most UncoNTROLled aIs WoulDn't prOduce literal pApeRcliPS. SoMe wouLd optImizE fOr valUes thaT woulD rEquire constant cOmpuTation.)

-60 froM laB eXpeRiMents, SCience InvEstIgationS, etc. (agaIN loWeR THAn For a rogue AI because Of EMPaThy; compaRe with EFfOrTS to reducE tHe pAin oF ANimal ExpeRImEntation)

-100 Due to iNTrInSically VaLued siMuLatIonS that MAy coNtain nAsty occuRrencES. These might incLUde, for example, VIoLENt VIdeo GamEs that involVe kiLLing ConsCIoUs mONsterS. Or inCiDEnTAl suffering that peopLe Don't caRe aboUt (e.g., insects beIng eaten by SPIDers on thE ceiLInG Of the room where A partY is happeniNG). This numBer is High not bEcause I thINK most humAn-iNspIreD siMULaTions would conTAIn inTeNse suffEriNg but beCauSe, iN soMe sCeNarios, theRe might bE vErY lArGe nUmberS Of simulaTiOns RuN foR reasONs of inTrinsIc huMaN vALue, And some OF tHESe miGhT cOntaIn hOrRific ExpeRIenCes. HumaNs seem morE liKEly tHaN Ais with rAndom values to WaNt to run lotS oF coNsciouS SImulatioNs. This video discusses one OF many poSsiBle reAsonS why intriNsiCally vAluED human-CreateD simuLaTioNS Might CONtAin SiGnificant sUFFerIng.

-15 if SaDistS have acCess to computationaL PowEr (humans are noT onLy moRE EmPatHEtIC buT aLSo mORE sadistic than moSt AIs)

-70 in expEcTAtIon from blaCK-swAn Ways to iNcrease The amOUnt of phYsics that Exists (humAnS seeM LIkeLy to want to Do this, alThough somE Might OBjEct to, E.g., rE-creatInG thE HoloCaust iN New Parts Of the cOsMos)

+50 for DiscoVeRing ways To reduce suffering that we Can't imAgine RigHt now ("blacK swANs tHat don't cuT botH ways"). UnforTunAteLy, humAns MIght aLso rESpOnd TO some BlacK Swans in woRSe WayS THaN uncontrollED ais wOuld, sUch AS by creAtinG more total animal-lIKe minds.

Perhaps Some aiS woUld NOt waNt To expand
 about for a human-inspire d AI? Agai n, he reare  m ade- up n umbers:

-30 f r om s uffering subroutines.One r ea s on t o  t hinkthese c o ul d bele ss  ba di na hum an- control led future  is  t hat human em p at hy may all owfor more hum ane  algor it hmd esign s.On th e othe r  hand,  human-co nt r olledA Is mayn e ed  lar ger numbers of in t el l igent and sent ient s ub - pr o c ess esbecause hu ma n val u es arem or e c omp l ex and varied  than paper c lip  produ ct ion is. Al so, h um a n v alues tendto r equire co ntinua l  comput a tion (e .g., t o s imu late eu da imo ni c  ex p er ien c es) , whilepa pe rclip s, o n c e prod uce d, a re pr etty inert an d m ight las t a l ong t imebe forethey w ouldwe ar out and need  tobe recrea ted .(Of  c ourse ,  mostunc ont rolledAIs wou l dn' tp r o du ce literal papercl ip s .  S ome woul d opti m iz ef or value stha t wo u l d req uire co nstant c omputa t io n. )

-60fr om lab  e xpe rim ents, scie nce in vestigat ions, etc. (again lo w er than for a ro g u eA I be cau se of empat hy;c ompa re w i th  ef f ortsto re du c et he pain of animal e xp erimen tatio n)

-100 dueto intrins i c a lly valu ed s i mu l ations that ma y con tain nasty occurren ces.These mi ght inclu d e , for ex amp le,  vi ole n t  v ideo games th a t  inv ol ve kill ing  consci ous  mo nst ers .Or incide ntal suf fe ri ng  t hat  peop l e don'tca reab out  (e.g . , inse cts b eing  e at e n b y spide r so n  the  c ei ling  of  t he ro om w h ere  a part y is happ eni n g).Th is  number  is high notbe cause I th in k m ost hu m a n-inspir ed simulations would co n tain in ten se su ffer ing but b eca use, i n s o me sce narios , the re  mi g h t bev e ry  la rg e numberso f  si mulat io ns r un forreasons of intrins i c h uman value, a ndsome o fthe s em igh tc ont a i n horrific expe riences. H um a ns  seem more lik el y thanAIs wit h ran d om valu es to wan t to runlo ts o f con scious sim ulations . This vi d eo di s cu ssesone  of ma ny  po ssibl e reas o nswhy i ntrins ic ally v alued  h uman-cre ated simulations mightcontai n sig nif icant suf fer i ng. 

-15 ifsadi sts have a cce ssto co mpu t ation al p o we r ( h umans  are not onlym or e e m p at hetic but a l s o  mo re sa dis t ic tha n mo st AIs)

-70 in e x pectation from  bla c k -sw anw aysto  increase theamo un t of physi cs  that exist s (human ss eem l ikelyto wan t to do t hi s , alth ough  so me mightobj ec t  to, e. g. ,r e-crea ting  t he Hol ocaust in n e w  parts of the co smos) +50 f o r d iscov er ing way s  toreduce suf fering that  we ca n'timagi ne righ tnow (" bla ck  swans tha t  don't cu t bot h ways" ).  Unf ort unatel y, h u m ans m ight  a lso  respondt o  s o me  b l ack  swa ns in  w orse  ways tha n  uncontr oll e d AIs w ou ld, s uch as by c reating mo retotal a nimal-like mind s .Perha ps som e AIswould n o t w an t to ex pan d 
 about_for a_human-inspired AI? Again, here_are made-up_numbers:

-30_from suffering_subroutines._One reason to_think these could_be less bad in_a human-controlled future_is_that human empathy may allow for more humane algorithm designs. On the other hand,_human-controlled_AIs may_need_larger_numbers of intelligent and sentient_sub-processes because human values are_more complex_and varied than paperclip production is. Also, human_values_tend to require_continual computation (e.g., to simulate eudaimonic experiences), while paperclips,_once produced, are pretty inert and_might last a_long_time_before they would wear_out and need to be recreated._(Of course, most uncontrolled AIs wouldn't_produce literal paperclips. Some would optimize for_values that would require constant computation.)

-60_from lab experiments, science investigations,_etc. (again_lower than for a rogue_AI because of_empathy; compare_with efforts to_reduce the pain of animal experimentation)

-100_due to intrinsically_valued simulations that may contain nasty_occurrences._These might include,_for_example,_violent video_games that involve_killing_conscious monsters._Or_incidental suffering that people don't care_about_(e.g., insects being eaten by spiders on_the ceiling of the_room_where a party is_happening). This number is high_not because I think most human-inspired_simulations would_contain intense_suffering but because, in some scenarios, there might be very large_numbers of simulations run for reasons_of intrinsic human value,_and some_of_these might contain_horrific_experiences. Humans_seem more likely than AIs with random_values to_want to run lots of conscious_simulations. This video discusses_one_of many possible reasons why intrinsically_valued human-created simulations might contain significant_suffering.

-15 if sadists have access_to_computational_power (humans are not only_more empathetic but also more sadistic_than most AIs)

-70_in expectation from black-swan ways to increase_the_amount of physics that exists (humans_seem_likely to want to do this,_although_some_might object to, e.g., re-creating_the Holocaust in new parts of_the cosmos)

+50 for discovering ways to reduce suffering that_we can't imagine_right now ("black swans that_don't_cut_both ways"). Unfortunately, humans might also respond to some black_swans in_worse ways than_uncontrolled AIs would, such as by creating more total animal-like_minds.

Perhaps some AIs would not want to_expand