Re: Post-Singularity Trade (was: Sysops, volition, and opting out)

From: Gordon Worley (
Date: Wed Aug 15 2001 - 20:36:05 MDT

At 1:04 AM +0000 8/16/01, Christian L. wrote:
>Gordon Worley wrote:
>>I think you are totally misunderstanding the Sysop.
>My definition of the Sysop would be something like: an entity that
>will divide up the energy of the solar-system/galaxy/[what have you]
>evenly among the citizens. When this entity recieves energy from a
>citizen, the energy is converted to a form asked for by the citizen
>(information, golf balls, ice-cream, the color of John Sticks
>underpants, ...) in the optimal way.
>This is my premise for scenario-building. It is not a prediction of
>What Will Happen.

Your premise is where I think you are mistaken. Until I see a
compelling reason why the Sysop would *have* to offer wish granting
services, I will not write about it formally. My paper (yes, I'm
working on it) concerns a minimalist Sysop, viz. only considers what
the Sysop *has* to do to ensure Friendliness in Sysop Space (this is
my latest way of expressing what the Sysop does and I offer up a
definition in my paper based *only* on what ramifications that has on
actions, I do not pretend to be able to sum up CFAI in a paragraph).

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