Re: Opting out of the Sysop scenario?

From: Gordon Worley (
Date: Mon Aug 06 2001 - 12:51:20 MDT

At 11:17 AM -0700 8/6/01, Durant Schoon wrote:
>This does, however, sound a bit like that nasty human project of
>just a few generations back: Imperialism, only now on a galactic
>scale. Hopefully Friendly Imperialism (preserving and enhancing
>volition) is actually the right thing to do (I think it is). The
>SI is charged with coming up with some version of a Prime
>Directive(*). So shortly after Singularity (or part of) we spread
>out to Alpha Centauri and reach all places where one might even
>think of travelling. Where ever you go, we will be there. The
>good thing is that if an Alien SI has something better than
>Friendliness, our SI should be smart enough to adopt it. (Scotty,
>Memetic Shields on full!)

Let's presume property rights are given by use. Therefore, it would
be violation the volition of the owners of whoever is using the
matter in this or that part of the universe to just make it part of
Sysop Space. But, unused space we should be free to use up if we
find it first and the conversion of it to computronium won't have an
adverse effect on anyone.

I hope, though, we don't actually use the Prime Directive, since that
would mean leaving millions of minds to die pathetically (OTOH, if no
one cares enough to do anything, that wouldn't be morally wrong, but
the option should be open to communicate and help less intelligent
life forms *if they want it*).

>(**) Are we trying to replace the phrase "Sysop", which is too

Well, I've gone from trying to replace to figuring out exactly what
we mean by the Sysop and what vis role really is.

Gordon Worley                     `When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty            said, `it means just what I choose                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