From: Stuart Armstrong (dragondreaming@googlemail.com)
Date: Tue Feb 10 2009 - 04:31:04 MST
Uploading, though nice, seems to have some unpleasant consequences
(either to those left behind, or through mass-copying). When told
about these consequences, a general cry goes up from some source (that
source being StrawMan(TM), the target of arguments since time
imemorial; but also some genuine sources as well):
"Let's ban that type of behaviour!"
Then others point out that, realistically, it's not going to be
possible to ban that behaviour - it will be unenforecable, because
that behaviour is easy, and people will want to do it. The next cry
will probably then be:
"Then let's ban uploading!"
But there is another alternative, since uploading is a unique
technology: since it aims to reproduce the desires and thoughts of the
uploady, there will probably be the possibility of changing those
desires and thoughts in the upload - enough to make the 'nasty' types
of behaviours rare (thus allowing a light legal restrictions on top,
that should be enforceable). This might be easier to justify if the
thoughts and desires of an uploader need to be changed anyway, to deal
with the completely new environment they find themselves in.
The example that I was thinking of was making uploads value standard
human produced goods (see previous posts), or wanting to avoid being
duplicated, but there are others ideas too.
Lots of fun questions possible then! Here are a few:
1) What sort of mental changes to uploads might be useful to forstall
certain problems?
2) Would this actually work?
3) How would you, personally feel if this was the only upload option -
either through government fiat or corporate requirements?
4) What sort of restrictions would you be prepared to accept, and
still upload - either for a non-destructive, or a destructive upload?
Unethical Stuart
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:01:04 MDT