--- Michael LaTorra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey Tom, > You wrote: > > On 6/26/07, Tom McCabe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > > --- Michael LaTorra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Bill Hibbard (author of _Super-Intelligent > Machines_ > > > and researcher in the > > > Machine Intelligence Project at the U. of > Wisconsin) > > > wrote (see > > > > http://www.ssec.wisc.edu:80/~billh/visfiles.html): > > > > > > "Currently, according to theory, every pair of > > > people on earth can be > > > connected by a chain of six people, with each > pair > > > in the chain acquainted > > > (this was illustrated by the movie *Six Degrees > of > > > Separation*). > > > > Please see > http://www.acceleratingfuture.com/tom/?p=12 > > for why you should avoid mentioning movies- or > fiction > > of any kind- in a futurist context. Even if you > > recognize that the movie's plot doesn't extend to > the > > future automatically, most people won't. > > > Please notice that I didn't write this, I quoted it. > If you have a problem > with what was written, take it up with the author.
Duly noted. For the record, I linked that because this post inspired me to write it to provide a handy, pre-made explanation of why you shouldn't make analogies to fiction in futurism. > > > A > > > super-intelligent machine that is everyone's > > > intimate will create one degree > > > of separation for all of humanity. This will > enable > > > it to introduce you to > > > your optimal mate and provide many other > wonderful > > > services." > > > > Why should there be any one "optimal" mate? > > Interactions between humans are ridiculously > complex > > and there's no a priori reason to think that you > can > > just sandwich every possible interaction between > you > > and someone else into a single scalar. > > > OK, first, let's stipulate that there could be more > than one mate that meets > the criteria for being optimal. "Optimal" means "the most desirable", and "most" inherently implies there's only one of them. That's why historians are so skittish about using the word- if there's even one event anywhere they haven't heard about that fits the criteria better, their statement is wrong. > Second, human beings > do not, in fact, ever > engage -- or want to engage -- in "every possible > interaction." Murder, for > instance. There is a very small minority of mates who would have a significant probability of murdering you, and this should be taken into account in the "optimal" calculus. > The actual range of desirable interactions > is not that large, It isn't that large compared to all possible interactions, but as an absolute, it's ridiculously large. How many bazillions of bazillions of atomic configurations would be seen by us as desirable? > and > exists within bounds determined by evolutionary > development and the personal > pattern of preferences arising over the span of an > individual's life > experience. Third, even if the AI could only come up > with a list of some > very likely candidates for being a good mating > "match" rather than some > ultimate perfect mate, I think the most interesting > aspect of this would be > who these people are in terms of geographic > location. Are they in places so > close to you geographically (and perhaps > socio-economically) that you might > have met them on your own? Or would some or most of > them be literally a > world away from you, such that there is virtually > zero probability that you > would ever have met without "artificial assistance"? I agree that this is an interesting question. > > > > > OK, AI as the ultimate dating service sounds > good. > > > But what other wonderful > > > services might AI provide? > > > > > > Please list your *Top AI Services to Humans* > (and be > > > as serious or playful > > > as you like :) > > > > Okay, to start with: > > > > - Total control over the structure of our minds, > with > > an AI-provided user-friendly interface. > > > Would you retain a baseline record of your mind, > just in case you discovered > that some of the structural changes you chose to > make did not in fact yield > desirable results? Me personally? Of course. > - The elimination of war, hunger, disease, old age, > > heart disease and a whole bunch of other > undesirable > > stuff. > > > Who could argue with that? > > - The ability to build anything that is physically > > possible given quantity X of raw materials, again > with > > a user-friendly interface and pre-designed > components. > > > The ultimate erector set. I like it. > > > Regards, > > > Mike LaTorra > > > > - Tom - Tom > > > ----- > > > 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/?&; > > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ > > Luggage? GPS? Comic books? > > Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search > > > http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=graduation+gifts&cs=bz > > > > ----- > > 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/?&; > > > > ----- > 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/?&; ____________________________________________________________________________________ Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today! http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7 ----- 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/?member_id=4007604&user_secret=7d7fb4d8
