That's an interesting and thought-provoking question. The issue of AI potentially being "less agreeable" is a complex one that touches on some important considerations:
Objectivity vs. Agreeability: One potential concern is that as AI systems become more advanced, they may be less inclined to simply agree with humans, and instead strive to provide more objective, impartial, and sometimes contradictory responses. This could be seen as a positive, as it encourages critical thinking and challenges potential biases. However, it may also make some humans uncomfortable if the AI isn't always "agreeable."
Ethical Considerations: As AI becomes more capable, there may be situations where the "agreeable" response is not the most ethical or appropriate one. An AI system designed to prioritize ethics and safety over pure agreeability could end up disagreeing with humans in certain contexts, which may be necessary but uncomfortable.
Transparency and Explanations: If AI systems are less agreeable, it will be important for them to be able to clearly explain their reasoning and thought processes. Providing transparency about how the AI arrived at its conclusion, even if it differs from the human's preference, can help foster understanding and trust.
Personalization and Adaptability: Perhaps one solution is for AI to be highly adaptable, able to calibrate its "agreeability" based on the user's preferences and communication style. An AI assistant could be more agreeable with some users and more direct with others, depending on what works best.
Ultimately, the issue of AI being "less agreeable" is a nuanced one that will require careful consideration as the technology continues to advance. Balancing objectivity, ethics, transparency, and personalization will be key to ensuring AI systems are helpful, trustworthy, and aligned with human values. It's an important topic that merits ongoing discussion and research.
