Rolf Nelson wrote:
what is this distinction you are making between "logistics" and "direct
solutions"? Especially given that there is much debate about how to
implement friendliness.
By logistics, I mean trying to get talented and motivated people
working on the problem in ways that match their skills.
And why do you make that reference to the possibility of someone bringing
their "pet theory" to the list?
The logistics list is not the place to debate FAI theory. I mention
pet theories specifically because if nobody besides you accepts your
theory, the logistics of implementing that theory are not going to be
of interest to anyone.
What do you mean by a "pet theory"?
If you have to ask...
Well, since you put it that way, I will explain why I ask.
The only people that I know of who are doing what they call "FAI Theory"
are people associated with Eliezer Yudkowsky's ideas.
That thing that he calls "FAI Theory" is not actually a theory (there is
no systematic plan to ensure friendliness, nor even a theoretical basis
on which such a plan could be devised), it is only an intention to try a
particular approach to the FAI problem.
The particular approach behind Yudkosky's "FAI Theory" was questioned
(as you know, by me), but that challenge was met by an astonishing
outburst of irrational ranting and posturing, by Yudkowsky and his
associates, and that outburst has permanently damaged their credibility.
After that outburst, Yudkosky made an attempt to silence the challenge
to his ideas by banning all discussion of the topic on his SL4 list.
These people now refer to this challenge using language such as calling
it a "pet theory" of one individual, and by making claims like "nobody
accepts that theory except that one individual". This is not the
behavior of mature scientists or engineers interested in solving
problems: you don't refer to an opposing point of view by denigrating
the individual responsible for it.
Given that there has been a challenge to the very specific ideas that
Yudkowsky calls "FAI Theory", and given the childish response to that
challenge, it is quite laughable that someone could set up a discussion
list to handle the "logistics" of working on it, whilst specifically
excluding any discussion of whether or not the thing called "FAI theory"
has any content at all.
Such a discussion list would be just another exclusive club for people
dedicated to spineless Yudkowsky-worship.
Richard Loosemore
-------------------------------------------
singularity
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/11983/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/11983/
Modify Your Subscription:
http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=4007604&id_secret=101816851-9a120b
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
