I would like to hear from others with this same point
of view, and otherwise from anyone who has a idea that
an open source AGI could be somehow made safe.
While I also don't believe that you can protect your open source AGI
from "what if [insert favorite bad guys] use it for nefarious purposes", I'm
of the opinion that the delta of how much they would benefit from it is far
less than the delta that " the good guys" would benefit from it.
Or, in other words, I suspect that it is far more likely that the
[favorite bad guys] are going to have the funding and fortitude to get to
AGI first while working alone than it is that the good guys can get to it
first working alone.
Also, in either case, open source will hasten AGI -- but less
detrimentally if the bad guys get it first (vs. very beneficially if the
good guys get it) -- since I also believe that earlier is also likely to be
less detrimental even if the bad guys DO get it (for a whole slew of reasons
including the beliefs that we are more likely to survive an early unfriendly
AI than a later unfriendly AI, that there are threats that a biased <read
not friendly but not totally unfriendly> AI will stop that could obliterate
us otherwise, and that any sufficiently advanced AGI will "go friendly"
given enough time).
On the whole, I'm in favor of open-sourcing AGI with some precautions
despite full knowledge that *no* precautions (including making something
proprietary) will stop a sufficiently determined and reasonably
knowledgeable bad guy (look at all the zero-day exploits coming out right on
the heels of proprietary vendor patches).
Mark
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <agi@v2.listbox.com>
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 11:20 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] AGI open source license
--- Russell Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
That having been said, if you're serious about
preventing the abuse of your
software, I think the only answer is, don't
distribute it. Follow the path
of Novamente and indeed Google themselves (albeit
for different reasons) and
keep the software on your own machines and sell the
services it provides.
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.
I would like to hear from others with this same point
of view, and otherwise from anyone who has a idea that
an open source AGI could be somehow made safe.
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.
-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily
deactivate your subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
