From: Marc Geddes (marc_geddes@yahoo.co.nz)
Date: Sat Jan 22 2005 - 21:37:13 MST
--- Thomas Buckner <tcbevolver@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I was referring (sloppily) the the nested precise
> engineering definitions he used as an example. As
> to your definition scheme, I think most of the
> critique is valid; but I know I couldn't do any
> better, and wouldn't try. I think a precise
> definition of Friendliness is impossible (well,
> problematical) until we fully grasp our own needs
> and wants, now *and* in the future! Suppose our
> well-placed limitations on the FAI succed
> perfectly in preventing it from going against our
> will, and in the process prevent it from doing
> something unforeseeable which we need?
>
> When I think of the maze of possible exigencies
> we might need to define for FAI, of all the
> individual decisions we might need to make on
> whether to permit or deny the FAI to act, I fear
> ending up with a nested precise definition tree
> which is itself too complex for human
> comprehension! I hope I'm wildly wrong about
> that.
>
> Friendliness is a brutally complex issue. Think
> how simple it was to define success with the
> Apollo moon landing. Go. Get rocks and photos.
> Come back alive. Hard to do, but easy to define.
> With FAI, on the other hand, one might say
> defining success *is* the hard part. The
> implementation cannot even properly begin with
> ill-defined goals.
> Be of good cheer: if it were easy everybody would
> be doing it.
>
My proposal was 100% precise and technical.
I proposed that in physics terms the actual ultimate
purpose of the Friendliness function is to move the
physical state of the universe closer to the Omega
Point.
I proposed that in maths terms, the specific function
that does this is the recursive function which
generates increasingly better approximations to
uncomputable Omega numbers.
I do not claim to have logical proof that I am right,
I am only putting forward a proposal for the
consideration of SL4 list members. That was why I
could only speculate on relatively vague reasons why I
may be right.
But my proposal for Friendliness is 100% technical and
100% clear cut. To repeat:
I proposed that in physics terms the actual ultimate
purpose of the Friendliness function is to move the
physical state of the universe closer to the Omega
Point.
I proposed that in maths terms, the specific function
that does this is the recursive function which
generates increasingly better approximations to
uncomputable Omega numbers.
It is not possible get any more technical or clear cut
than that.
=====
Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.
http://au.movies.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Feb 21 2006 - 04:22:51 MST