From: H C (email@example.com)
Date: Tue Jun 28 2005 - 12:41:07 MDT
If you are incredibly rich and aren't trying to optimize your situation- ie.
life extension, MNT, Singularity, etc. then you aren't intelligent. You are
Also, people in general (including the rich) tend to make decisions and
structure their beliefs on irrational, emotional bases (instead of a logical
You can't control the desire for optimization in someone (aka their
intelligence) with a dial, unless that dial is operating some mysterious
fundmantal process in their brain.
>From: justin corwin <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>Subject: Re: of possible interest: interaction with autonomous agents
>Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 10:48:55 -0700
>On 6/28/05, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky <email@example.com> wrote:
> > That's an odd thing to say. Do you mean that all else being equal, you
> > that people in more powerful positions are probably more intelligent?
> > backed by the data. But do you mean that people in more powerful
> > are by definition more intelligent? That in virtue of having more
> > they are smarter? This would mean that I could stand outside an
> > and control someone's intelligence with a dial.
>This is disingenous. No matter what intelligence is based on, if it
>has a physical basis, you could experimentally control it with a dial.
>It's also not true that powerful people simply have more options.
>They're also exercising more options, which means a host of other
>things, like owning good tools, getting better information, continuing
>education, and possibly having underlings to assist them. These things
>all have an effect on demonstrated intelligence, but perhaps not in a
>static IQ test.
>It's also important to note that intelligent behavior is affected by
>good feedback and emotional reinforcement, both of which powerful
>people get much more readily.
>I suppose that puts me in weak agreement with your second
>interpretation of Lee's statement. Powerful people have more
>opportunity to be intelligent, and thus more of them are intelligent,
>because of being powerful.
>You could experimentally confirm this by testing or looking at the
>tests of people who became powerful via no action of their own, like
>hereditary wealth, random lottery, or battlefield promotion.
>in active experimentation, you could just make random people powerful
>for varying periods at varying levels and test before and after, if
>there's a state lottery that would be willing to cooperate.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jun 18 2013 - 04:00:46 MDT