Matt and Mark,
I think you both missed my point, but in different ways, namely, that there
is a LOT of traffic here on this forum over a problem that appears easy to
resolve once and for all time, and further, that the solution may work for
much more important worldwide social problems.
Continuing with responses to specific points...
On 11/18/08, Mark Waser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> Seed AI is a myth.
> Ah. Now I get it. You are on this list solely to try to slow down
> progress as much as possible . . . . (sorry that I've been so slow to
> realize this)
>
No. Like you, we are all trying to put this OT issue out of our misery. I do
appreciate Matt's efforts, misguided though they may be.
Continuing with Matt's comments...
> *From:* Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> *To:* agi@v2.listbox.com
> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 18, 2008 8:23 PM
> *Subject:* **SPAM** Re: [agi] My prospective plan to neutralize AGI and
> other dangerous technologies...
>
>
> Steve, what is the purpose of your political litmus test?
>
>
>
> I had no intention at all of imposing any sort of political test, beyond
simply looking for some assurance that they weren't about to use the
technology to kill anyone who wasn't in desperate need of being killed.
If you are trying to assemble a team of seed-AI programmers with the
> "correct" ethics, forget it. Seed AI is a myth.
>
>
>
> I agree, though my reasoning may be a bit different than yours. Why would
any thinking machine ever want to produce a better thinking machine?
Besides, I can take bright but long-term low-temp people like Loosemore, who
appears to be an absolutely perfect candidate, and make them super-human
intelligent by simply removing the impairment that they have learned to live
with. In Loosemore's case, this is probably the equivalent of several
alcoholic drinks, yet he is pretty bright even with that impairment. I would
ask you to imagine what he would be without that impairment, but it may
well be beyond anyone here's ability to imagine, and well on the way to a
"seed", though I suspect that with much more intelligence than he already
has, that he would question that goal.
Thanks everyone for your comments.
Steve Richfield
=
--- On *Tue, 11/18/08, Steve Richfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>*wrote:
>
> From: Steve Richfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [agi] My prospective plan to neutralize AGI and other
> dangerous technologies...
> To: agi@v2.listbox.com
> Date: Tuesday, November 18, 2008, 6:39 PM
>
> Richard and Bill,
>
> On 11/18/08, BillK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 1:22 PM, Richard Loosemore wrote:
>> > I see how this would work: crazy people never tell lies, so you'd be
>> able
>> > to nail 'em when they gave the wrong answers.
>>
> Yup. That's how they pass lie detector tests as well.
>>
>> They sincerely believe the garbage they spread around.
>
>
> In 1994 I was literally sold into servitude in Saudi Arabia as a sort of
> slave programmer (In COBOL on HP-3000 computers) to the Royal Saudi Air
> Force. I managed to escape that situation with the help of the same
> Wahhabist Sunni Muslims that are now causing so many problems. With that
> background, I think I understand them better than most people.
>
> As in all other societies, they are not given the whole truth, e.g. most
> have never heard of the slaughter at Medina, and believe that Mohamed never
> hurt anyone at all.
>
> My hope and expectation is that, by allowing people to research various
> issues as they work on their test, that a LOT of people who might otherwise
> fail the test will instead reevaluate their beliefs, at least enough to come
> up with the right answers, whether or not they truly believe them. At least
> that level of understanding assures that they can carry on a reasoned
> conversation. This is a MAJOR problem now. Even here on this forum, many
> people still don't get *reverse* reductio ad absurdum.
>
> BTW, I place most of the blame for the middle east impasse on the West
> rather than on the East. The Koran says that most of the evil in the world
> is done by people who think they are doing good, which brings with it a good
> social mandate to publicly reconsider and defend any actions that others
> claim to be evil. The next step is to proclaim evil doers as "unwitting
> agents of Satan". If there is still no good defense, then they drop the
> "unwitting". Of course, us stupid uncivilized Westerners have fallen into
> this, and so 19 brave men sacrificed their lives just to get our attention,
> but even that failed to work as planned. Just
