I'm sorry, what is AGI again?
Andrew Yost, PhD
Forest Ecologist
Oregon Dept. of Forestry
Salem, OR 97310
503-945-7410

  _____  

From: Derek Zahn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2007 11:02 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [singularity] Benefits of being a kook


This message is "semi-serious".
 
The latest SIAI blog laments the apparently dismissive attitude of
mainstream media toward  the singularity summit (and presumably the
concept in general, and SIAI itself by  extension).  Maybe it's not the
worst thing thing that could happen.
 
Consider the war in Iraq (oops, I just lost half my readers!  But this
is not a political  tirade, it's about AGI):  The "reason" for this war,
in my opinion, is to establish a base from which the USA can exert
social, cultural, economic, and military pressure on people  who might
use nasty weapons against the USA or its friends.  Whether such a
project is noble or effective is unimportant.  What is important is that
the USA is so scared of  having our people and stuff blown up that we'll
spend a trillion dollars and thousands of lives on a rather speculative
strategy for fighting the threat.
 
Now our little gang is basically saying that AGI is WAY more dangerous
than any little  nuclear bomb or other WMD.  Thank the AGI and Bayes its
prophet that they think we're  kooks, they'd shut us down in a heartbeat
if they didn't!
 
Can they?  As an arbitrary thought experiment, let's say that a
beyond-human AGI can be built on a 1000-pc cluster.  Modern computer
chips are incredibly complicated devices that  can only be produced in
massive high-tech fabrication facilities.  I could easily imagine the
government attempting to regulate these plants and their products like
any other  hazardous but useful substance, and bombing fabs if they are
constructed in North Korea or  Iran.  Controlling proliferation of
radioactive material in this way has been at least  somewhat effective,
and maybe spending a trillion dollars in an effort to do the same thing
to CPUs could seem to powerful people to be a good idea, especially if
the  threat is not only physical but also spiritual.
 
That doesn't stop Russia or China etc from building AGI, so I suppose
we'd also have treaties to prevent AGI development that we'd secretly
cheat on, so all of us will end up  in windowless cinderblock cubicles
in Los Alamos.
 
Now let's follow up on the recent speculation on the AGI list that a
cheap laptop is  actually enough processing power.  In that case, the
hardware restriction policy would be  necessary but also too late.  AGI
work itself can still be banned.  What sort of additions  to the Patriot
Act would be needed to make sure that we are not working on AGI in
secret?
 
Also in this case, amusingly, the well-publicised effort to make sure
every kid on the  planet has a cheap laptop is basically making sure
that every kid on the planet has  something worse than a nuclear bomb
kit.  Maybe all those kids are too dumb to figure out how to assemble
it.
 
Next, consider religious fundamentalists.  Those people are able to
follow a chain of  reasoning that leads them to blow up abortion
clinics, marketplaces, and fly airplanes  into buildings to protect
their points of view.  AGI and the singularity are much larger  threats
to their world view than any current target.  How attractive a bomb
target is the singularity summit itself or an artificial intelligence
conference?  Thank the AGI and  Bayes its prophet that they think we're
kooks, they'd kill us if they didn't!
 
Why do we care whether the world thinks we're kooks or not?
 
1) We want to beg for money, and people don't give money to kooks.  Fair
enough, but another approach that good true ideas with economic value
can take is to earn money instead by selling people things with value.
 
2) If we "raise awareness", perhaps a better-informed "common man" will
help make a "positive" singularity more likely.  It's possible.  Getting
more people who think technically for a living (scientists, engineers)
convinced could also be beneficial (in case us believers don't have the
right answers yet and aren't going to find them soon).  If those
people's opinions are driven by what they see on tv news or the wall
street journal, the scent of kookery is not too helpful.
 
3) Bloggers and websites are successful in proportion to the number of
hits they get, and kooks don't get many hits.
 
Any other good reasons we should care whether journalists heap scorn on
our efforts?


  _____  

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/?&;
1 

-----
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&id_secret=45330595-8f78fb

Reply via email to