Re: Sysop hacking

From: ben goertzel (
Date: Wed Feb 06 2002 - 10:25:42 MST

> > Us trying to understand whether hacking the Sysop will be possible, is
> > like a very smart dog, who has intuited a little bit of what human
> > is like, trying to make projections about the complex machinations of a
> > dispute in intellectual property law.
> >
> > ben g
> Yes, Ben. That's why my actual answer to the question was "I don't
> know."

Eliezer, I wasn't trying to dispute anything you had said; I was just trying
more colorfully and succinctly do the same thing that you were doing in your

Actually it seems to me that you and I agree on almost everything to do with
the Singularity.

As far as I can tell our most serious disagreements are:

a) specific design strategies for seed AI [we both agree that detailed brain
    is not necessary though, unlike kurzweil]

b) the probable speed of the hard takeoff (exactly how hard is hard? you
think it'll
    be faster than I do)

c) our estimates of the conditional probability difference

        Prob( friendly post-singularity AI | friendly seed AI) -
                Prob(friendly post-singularity AI| neutral seed AI)

And I consider these basically to be differences of intuition, not
resolvable through
empirical evidence or logical argumentation at the moment.

-- Ben

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:37 MDT