Claim · 2015-05-05 · publication · Stated in source · Supported

Loosemore (2015) attributes to Omohundro's The Basic AI Drives (2008) the argument that an AGI will feel compelled to pursue its objectives more efficiently, and disputes that argument.

One recorded claim. The claim panel gives its qualification, the source passages with their place in each source, and how it was checked.

What it connects

Debunking Fallacies in the Theory of AI Motivation → attributes to → The Basic AI Drives

Where it appears

No collection page holds this claim. It is listed with its records in the explorer.

Claim and evidence

Debunking Fallacies in the Theory of AI Motivationattributes to ↓The Basic AI Drives

Machine-checked, not reviewed by an editorStated in sourceSupported

Supporting evidence: primary · 1 source

Date: 2015-05-05 · publication Records dated 2015 →
Kind of attribution: Attributes an argument to the work and disputes it

Scope and limitsThe citing text's characterisation of an argument it rejects; not evidence that the characterisation is accurate or that either view is correct.

The evidence 01

primary sourceSupports the claim

Debunking Fallacies in the Theory of AI Motivation

LessWrong · 2015-05-05

Archived copy, captured 2019-08-25: Debunking Fallacies in the Theory of AI Motivation

Cite the original source

Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.

Source excerpt

“In The Basic AI Drives (2008) Omohundro suggests that if an AGI can find a more efficient way to pursue its objectives it will feel compelled to do so.”

Location in source page text, section “Omohundro’s Basic AI Drives”, para. 1

Machine-checked · 2026-10-31

Source details and check notes

Authors: Richard Loosemore
Version: Text checked in the post’s first stored version through the LessWrong GraphQL API on 2026-10-06; content version 1.0.0.
Canonical address: Open the canonical source ↗
Accessed: 2026-10-06
Language: English (en)
Archive copy: Open archived copy, captured 2019-08-25: Debunking Fallacies in the Theory of AI Motivation. Captured 1573 days after the recorded publication date. An archive copy shows only what the archive retrieved on 2019-08-25. It does not prove what the page said earlier, and it can differ from the copy checked on 2026-10-06.
Attribution: Richard Loosemore, "Debunking Fallacies in the Theory of AI Motivation", LessWrong, 2015-05-05.
Reuse: No open redistribution licence asserted. Bibliographic metadata, editorial paraphrases and short attributed quotations (at most 50 words each). Recheck terms before wider redistribution.
Check notes: Candidate pack passage, key papers (research/key-papers). The quotation (29 words) matched the text retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-28 (research/key-papers/verification.json). Matching ignored differences of whitespace, case, quotation marks, dashes and line-break hyphens, so the source’s typography can differ. A cross-family machine check (2026-10-30, item B008) found the attribution at its locator and in the citing text’s reference entry. No human editorial review.

Status and meaning

Editorial status. Not reviewed by an editor. An exploratory record that no editor has accepted. This status does not say whether a person has read any linked passage. Each evidence record above shows how it was checked.

Relation. A document expressly attributes an argument, concept, term, finding or approach to another work, in its own words; the kind of attribution is recorded. The record is the citing document’s claim. It is not evidence that the cited work originated the idea, that the attribution is accurate, or of influence beyond the passage. Citation alone is recorded as a citation.

Date. Date of the citing text as the dataset records it (5 May 2015).

Record ID kp-shaping-loosemore-omohundro