Claim and evidence Close ×
Davis's review of Bostrom's Superintelligence, dated October 2014, disputes the view that giving a computer an ethical point of view is especially difficult, arguing that an AI able to understand human morality could be told to follow it. Copy claim link
Copy claim reference
Machine-checked, not reviewed by an editor Stated in source Supported
Supporting evidence: primary · 1 source
Date 2014-10-23 · publication Records dated 2014 → Role Contesting, Earliest located Register (kind of text) Nonfiction Engagement Engages a premise. It disputes the premise that instilling ethics is harder than achieving the intelligence that is assumed. Scope and limits The review proposes a minimal ethical standard and states that it is impossible until an AI with a very powerful understanding exists; it does not report an implemented method.
The evidence 02 primary source Supports the claim
Ethical Guidelines for A Superintelligence ↗ Author's site (cs.nyu.edu); a review of Bostrom's Superintelligence, published in Artificial Intelligence 220 (2015) · 2014-10-23
Copy source reference
Cite the original source Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.
Copy APA
Download BibTeX Download RIS Download CSL-JSON
Source excerpt “I discuss a number of flaws in his analysis, particularly the viewpoint that implementing ethical behavior is an especially difficult problem in AI research.” Location in source Abstract, PDF p. 1
How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher
Machine-checked · 2026-10-31
Source details and check notes Authors Ernest Davis Version Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29 (SHA-256 3ebd30310c695a6d3fb6b6dc245c2ecfc07698a486a238b6c016014c0b442ce3). Author's PDF dated October 23, 2014. The cross-family check retrieved it again on 2026-10-31, with the same bytes. Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-29 Language English (en) Attribution Ernest Davis, “Ethical Guidelines for A Superintelligence”, 2014-10-23. 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, arguments about catastrophic risk from advanced AI (research/risk-debate). The quotation (24 words) matched the text retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29. Matching ignored differences of whitespace, case, quotation marks, dashes and Unicode compatibility forms, so the source’s typography can differ. No human editorial review. primary source Supports the claim
Ethical Guidelines for A Superintelligence ↗ Author's site (cs.nyu.edu); a review of Bostrom's Superintelligence, published in Artificial Intelligence 220 (2015) · 2014-10-23
Copy source reference
Cite the original source Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.
Copy APA
Download BibTeX Download RIS Download CSL-JSON
Source excerpt “If the AI can understand human morality, it is hard to see what is the technical difficulty in getting it to follow that morality.” Location in source PDF p. 3
How it was read Retrieved directly from the publisher
Machine-checked · 2026-10-31
Source details and check notes Authors Ernest Davis Version Retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29 (SHA-256 3ebd30310c695a6d3fb6b6dc245c2ecfc07698a486a238b6c016014c0b442ce3). Author's PDF dated October 23, 2014. The cross-family check retrieved it again on 2026-10-31, with the same bytes. Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-29 Language English (en) Attribution Ernest Davis, “Ethical Guidelines for A Superintelligence”, 2014-10-23. 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, arguments about catastrophic risk from advanced AI (research/risk-debate). The quotation (24 words) matched the text retrieved for the candidate pack on 2026-10-29. Matching ignored differences of whitespace, case, quotation marks, dashes and Unicode compatibility forms, so the source’s typography can differ. 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 passage of the document disputes the proposition or a premise it depends on. The record documents the text’s position, not who is right.
Date. Date of publication, as the source gives it.
Record ID rd-r06-davis-2014-ethical-guidelines-superintelligence