From: James Higgins (jameshiggins@earthlink.net)
Date: Sat Jul 28 2001 - 13:46:16 MDT
Hate to point this out, but unless one of us becomes significantly
independently wealthy, any "Real AI" project will almost certainly be
backed by corporate financing. So a "Red Button" is not going to be a
viable option most likely. Maybe the technical head of the team may have
some secret trojan that would wipe out the code on command, but there will
be backups (probably some of them off-site), etc. On the other hand, most
corporations don't like the idea of having their code available to the
public either. So I imagine it would be fairly well protected.
James Higgins
At 02:34 PM 7/28/2001 -0400, you wrote:
>At 8:31 AM -0400 7/28/01, Ben Goertzel wrote:
>>Frankly, although I think it's unlikely, I would *much* rather see the first
>>real AI created by Hugo, who is basically a sweet guy who has thought deeply
>>about the philosophical ramifications of AI, than by oh, say, a US military
>>AI lab.... I don't think that mild-mannered eccentric scientists are our
>>greatest worry by any means.
>
>Actually, they could be our greatest worry. For example, let's say in
>five years we have the basic core for AI developed (I'm thinking back to
>when you, Ben, mentioned that WM has a core of about 200 lines of code
>that make the whole thing work) and it works well. At the same time, Eli
>hasn't finished the Friendliness module yet (let's say it's version 0.9
>and may still have a bug or two and is clearly marked as not ready for
>production use yet). Now, some "sweet guy" who is a "mild-mannered
>eccentric" gets ahold of both and wants to do an AI project on his own
>just for fun. Well, if he's not careful, we could all be hosed. Ergo, it
>is key that the really important code for AI be kept out of the hands of
>all but a few qualified people who really know how to use it. At all
>times, such code should be under a red button if you will, so it can be
>destroyed easily if it looks like the wrong people might get ahold of it
>(by the wrong people I mean ignorant, well-meaning researchers and evil
>corporations and governments).
>--
>Gordon Worley `When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty
>http://www.rbisland.cx/ said, `it means just what I choose
>redbird@rbisland.cx it to mean--neither more nor less.'
>PGP: 0xBBD3B003 --Lewis Carroll
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:37 MDT