I'm still not convinced you're both talking about exactly the same thing, but
I'll leave it for you two to decide. I would definitely suggest for anyone
working on FAI debunking to make sure you are aiming at the right target.
It would be much easier to aim at the right target if the target was
properly defined. There are endless megabytes of text about friendly
AI on the internet, but still no precise formal definition. That was, and
remains, may main problem with FAI. If you believe that the only safe
AI is one that has been mathematically proven to be 100% safe, then
you will need a 100% water tight formal mathematical definition of what
this means. Until I see such a definition, I'm not convinced that FAI is
really going anywhere.
Shane
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
