From: Russell Wallace (russell.wallace@gmail.com)
Date: Tue May 10 2005 - 10:09:59 MDT
On 5/10/05, Sebastian Hagen <sebastian_hagen@gmx.de> wrote:
> Russell Wallace wrote:
> > So you don't personally care if everything of value is destroyed?
> No; I don't personally care if everything a technically valid CV of
> humanity decides to be not worth being preserved is destroyed. I'm in no
> position to determine whether 'sentience' matters; I don't even really
> understand what it is. If the CV decided that it doesn't matter (not
> that I consider that especially likely), and the last judge agreed, I'd
> accept these decisions as most likely right.
Okay, I suppose that's a fundamental disagreement of philosophy.
> Generalizing from a lot of real evidence, I'd expect the output from a
> (working) CV process to be significantly better than that of any group
> of unupgraded humans. If Domain Protection is the implementation with
> the highest expected utility, a CV implementation will either fail
> safely (assuming the friendliness architecture works, as has been
> mentioned) or decide on implementing Domain Protection.
Then I suppose we had better hope CV will either work (my guess being
this is unlikely) or fail safely.
What if CV does end up failing safely? Would you then agree on DP as a
fallback strategy?
- Russell
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Feb 21 2006 - 04:22:56 MST