I assume that you fully understand the benefits and
business case of an open source project, and that your
point is made even with the former fully considered.
Yes. For that matter, my answer would be the same if you proposed a closed source project that sold a binary distribution like Microsoft Office.
I would respond to the proprietary AGI alternative
with the observation that one may suppose, as do I,
that only one AGI is safer than many, possibly
opposing, AGIs. With the proprietary model, there
will be a market for others to enter. On the other
hand an established open source project precludes
competition, e.g. only one Wikipedia.
I think safety is maximized by maximizing the probability of successful development of AGI within whatever time we have available rather than trying to minimize the probability that one or more AGIs will be abused, but that is a different question. If minimizing the probability that an AGI will be abused is your priority, the best approach might be to try to get there first and remain so far ahead of the competition as to have a near monopoly, as e.g. IBM did in the mainframe market in its heyday.
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
