From: Dale Johnstone (DaleJohnstone@email.com)
Date: Tue Mar 27 2001 - 19:52:08 MST
Christian L. wrote (quoting Dale Johnstone):
>>List members do *not* get to define what is evil and what is banished.
>Oops. This has already been done:
>"To eliminate all INVOLUNTARY pain, death, coercion, and stupidity from
No, you're getting rules for citizens and rules for the SysOp confused.
The distinction I'm trying to make is that we don't give the SysOp a list of all the nasty things to ban. We build a good mind and provide a rich education for it and eventually it *understands* what we mean. We don't want a stupid AI that mindlessly follows rules and lists - that's not even AI as far as I'm concerned.
>Even if it understands us and our desires, I don't see why it would
>automatically become our servant. We might understand the desires of an
>ant-colony, but if we need the place, we remove the anthill.
It is not our servant. There is no master-slave relationship. It has built-in Friendliness - a top level goal. That's why it wants to be Friendly. What it means to be Friendly is fleshed out by its education, just like a humans.
BTW the ant-colony isn't sentient, you can't use that in place of humans. Besides I wouldn't want to harm it anyway. Yes, I'm a vegetarian too.
>I assure you, I did understand it before. I just don't see the point in idle
>speculation about the actions of eventual SIs. It will do as it pleases. If
>we manage to program it into Friendliness, it will be Friendly. Maybe it
>will ignore humans. Maybe it will kill us. I don't know.
Ignoring humans is not Friendly - it won't do that.
Killing humans is not Friendly - it won't do that.
Helping humans is Friendly - it will do that.
Please have another go at reading Eli's Friendliness paper.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:36 MDT