From: H C (lphege@hotmail.com)
Date: Wed Jul 26 2006 - 08:15:53 MDT
>From: "R. W." <rtwebb43@yahoo.com>
>accepting mortality?
Maybe I'm misunderstanding the context in which you say this, but don't
expect any love for that proposition here.
-hank
>From: "R. W." <rtwebb43@yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: sl4@sl4.org
>To: sl4@sl4.org
>Subject: Re: CNN article with Bostrom interview and Kurzweil quotes
>Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 06:26:59 -0700 (PDT)
>
>Apparantly, we are already benefitting from limited AI. I am am cautious
>in my promotion of a fully self-conscious strong AI. The necessity of
>having a being like that amongst us is dubious at best. The probability of
>this potential becoming a reality increases at least geometrically and most
>likely exponentially with our increased intellectual capacity and knowledge
>base. The argument for a strong AI seems very similar to the argument for
>a nuclear weapon...the first country to have one would have an incredible
>advantage over others in at least a superficial political sense. Humans are
>often irrational and this kind of motivation could lead to a strong AI
>'arms race'. Sane people would want FAI simply to reduce to existential
>risk such a being would pose to us; but people often act on emotion and not
>reason.
>
> Creating an uncontrollable being who's intelligence is beyond ours to
>the nth degree is what many are forecasting to be our future reality. We
>already have a G-d whom we can't understand or control. Why do we need
>another one? Wouldn't it be better just to build better tools and better
>methods for developing rational, moral human beings, and accepting
>mortality?
>
> I keep returning to the same thought..."Someone will succeed in this
>endeavor at some point in my lifetime, my children's lifetime or
>grandchildren's lifetime." Therefore, we must build an invariant
>mathematical model of friendly behaviour before we build a mind capable of
>destroying us.
>
> If we could build such a model of behaviour and methods of instilling
>this model in humans then what would we really need an FAI for? The answer
>seems to be that we need insurance against an unfriendly AI.
>
>Olie Lamb <neomorphy@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/26/06, M T wrote:
> >
> > http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science/07/24/ai.bostrom/index.html
>
>I noticed their little quick-poll posed the question "Does Artificial
>Intelligence pose a greater threat or benefit to humanity?"
>
>*Sigh*
>
>I mean, if they'd asked "How real is the threat from AI?" and "How
>much benefit is AI likely to bring?" Then we might get some useful
>results.
>
>-- Olie
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates
>starting at 1¢/min.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:56 MDT