Samantha Atkins wrote: >> No it hasn't. People want public surveillance. > Guess I am not people then.
Then why are you posting your response to a public forum instead of replying by encrypted private email? People want their words to be available to the world. > I don't think the global brain needs to know exactly how often I have sex or >with whom or in what varieties. Do you? A home surveillance system needs to know who is in your house and whether they belong there. If it is intelligent then it will know that you prefer not to have video of you having sex broadcast on the internet. At the same time, it has to recognize what you are doing. Public surveillance is less objectionable because it will be two-way and can't be abused. If someone searches for information about you, then you get a notification of who it was and what they learned. I describe how this works in http://mattmahoney.net/agi2.html > No humans will control it and it is not going to be that expensive. Humans will eventually lose control of anything that is smarter than them. But we should delay that as long as possible by making the required threshold the organized intelligence of all humanity, and make that organization as efficient as possible. The cost is on the order of $1 quadrillion because the knowledge that AGI needs is mostly in billions of human brains and there is no quick way to extract it. -- Matt Mahoney, matmaho...@yahoo.com ________________________________ From: Samantha Atkins <sjatk...@gmail.com> To: agi <agi@v2.listbox.com> Sent: Tue, August 3, 2010 6:49:34 AM Subject: Re: [agi] Walker Lake Matt Mahoney wrote: Steve Richfield wrote: >> How about an international ban on the deployment of all unmanned and >> automated >>weapons? > >How about a ban on suicide bombers to level the playing field? > > >> 1984 has truly arrived. > > >No it hasn't. People want public surveillance. Guess I am not people then. Actually I think surveillance is inevitable given current and all but certain future tech. However, I recognize that human beings today, and especially their governments, are not remotely ready for it. To be ready for it at the very least the State would have to consider a great number of things none of its business to attempt to legislate for or against. As it is with the current incredible number of arcane laws on the books it would be very easy to see the already ridiculously large prison population of the US double. Also, please note that full surveillance means no successful rebellion no matter how bad the powers that be become and how ineffectual the means that let remain legal are to change things. Ever. It is also necessary for AGI. In order for machines to do what you want, they have to know what you know. It is not necessary to have every waking moment surveilled in order to have AGI know what we want. In order for a global brain to use that knowledge, it has to be public. I don't think the global brain needs to know exactly how often I have sex or with whom or in what varieties. Do you? AGI has to be a global brain because it is too expensive to build any other way, and because it would be too dangerous ifthe whole world didn't control it. No humans will control it and it is not going to be that expensive. - samantha agi | Archives | Modify Your Subscription ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
