Pesky premature e-mail problem . . .
The discussions seem to entirely ignore the role of socialization
in human and animal friendliness. We are a large collection of
autonomous agents that are well-matched in skills and abilities.
If we were unfriendly to one another, we might survive as a species,
but we would not live in cities and posses hi-tech.
You are correct. The discussions are ignoring the role of socialization.
We also know from the animal kingdom, as well as from the
political/economic sphere, what happens when abilities are
mis-matched. Lions eat gazelles, and business tycoons eat
the working class. We've evolved political systems to curb
the worst abuses of feudalism and serfdom, but have not yet
achieved nirvana.
Because we do *not* have a common definition of goals and socially
acceptable behavior. Political systems have not acheived nirvana because
they do not agree on what nirvana looks like. *THAT* is the purpose of
this
entire thread.
As parents, we apply social pressure to our children, to make
them friendly. Even then, some grow up unfriendly, and for them,
we have the police. Unless they achieve positions of power first
(Hitler, Stalin, Mao).
OK. But I'm actually not attempting to use social pressure (or use it
solely). I seem to have gotten somewhat shunted down that track by Vladmir
since a Friendly society is intelligent enough to use social pressure when
applicable but it is not the primary (or necessary) thrust of my argument.
I don't see how a single AGI could be bound by the social
pressures that we are bound by. There won't be a collection
of roughly-equal AGI's keeping each other in check, not if they
are self-improving. Self-preservation is rational, and so is
paranoia; its reasonable to assume that agi will race to
self-improve merely for the benefit of self-preservation, so
that they've enough power so that others can't hurt them.
Again, social pressure is not my primary argument. It just made an easy
convenient correct-but-not-complete argument for Vladimir (and now I'm
regretting it :-).
Our hope is that AGI will conclude that humans are harmless
and worthy of study and preservation; this is what will make
them friendly to *us*.. until one day we look like mosquitoes
or microbes to them.
No, our hope is that the AGI will conclude that anything with enough
intelligence/goal-success is more an asset than a liability and that wiping
us out without good cause has negative utility.
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription:
http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=95818715-a78a9b
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
