Re: Si definition of Friendliess

From: Chris Cooper (
Date: Fri Apr 06 2001 - 11:43:05 MDT

James Higgins wrote:

>This has got to be the most complex piece of software I've ever
imagined. If not from a code point of view (you may be able to simplify
much of the code since this is a "seed") then at least architecturally. To
say that your group is capable of creating the most complex and ambitious
software project ever, without making any mistakes is the most arrogant
thing I've ever heard. Bar none.<

I was a little too polite to bring this up in quite this way, but James does have
a point here. All of my previous misgivings come down to the simple fact that
mistakes do happen. If I'm going to trust my future existence to this idea, I
want to have confidence that it will come out as you seem to think it will. I'm
not a programmer, so I have to rely on others to make the necessary breakthrough.

It's obvious that there is great confidence in this course of action, among the
members of this list. It's not unreasonable for a newcomer to ask, "Why?"

 Please don't take these statements as attack. I think that we are all on the
same side here. It's just that the more recent arrivals don't have the benefit of
participating in the years of previous discussions on these topics. I agree with
James that the best way to avoid repeating these discussions might be to create
some sort of statement, one that would address these issues in more detail.
Eliezer has already covered some of these topics at various points in his
writing, but it might be a good idea to condense this stuff into one place, as an
introduction to the subject, perhaps. (the Singularity for Dummies?) As the
Singularity gets closer, it will become more and more important to have this type
of material, otherwise, you'll never stop answering and re-answering these


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:36 MDT