From: Natasha Vita-More (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Nov 18 2010 - 08:50:48 MST
Thanks Tim for your view on Asimov's three laws. Gave me a chuckle.
As much as I adore Eli's clever writing, re the piece on "Predicting the
Future" I have to say that using the 50's vision of the future as a general
public perspective is mistaken. That went down with women wanting to be
"pretty" (referring to Eli's play on Harry Potter (women want to be sexy and
smart, not pretty (i.e., delicacy)).
I'd like to see a stronger incorporation of design in the theoretical
writings and visionary musings on FAI. Design is a complex field and
contains practicality, rationality and functionalism, along with a
cybernetic adaptive sensibility.
Natasha Vita-More <http://www.natasha.cc>
MSc, MPhil, PhD Researcher, University of Plymouth
Board of Directors: Humanity+
Fellow: Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies
Visiting Scholar: 21st Century Medicine
Advisor: Singularity University
From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of Tim Freeman
Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2010 6:57 PM
Subject: Re: [sl4] Simple friendliness: plan B for AI
From: Piaget Modeler <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>What do we do about Asimov's three laws where military AI is concerned?
Ignore them. They were contrived to give Asimov interesting conflict he
could write about, not to solve any real-world problems. This is discussed
Eliezer says not to generalize from fiction, and I agree. See
-- Tim Freeman http://www.fungible.com email@example.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:01:05 MDT