Samantha Atkins sniffs,
> Uh, excuse me, but that attitude is just as bad as that of any
> eschatologically minded fundie.
Yeah, it's just as "bad" because you define "bad" according to the belief system
installed in you by the establishment and your own biology.
> Those "fundies and fanatics" think a lot like you.
I'd ask you for details of your method of insuring world peace and friendly AI,
but apparently that method hasn't worked very well, from what I've heard of
current global events. If there's something worse than lunatic fundies it's
probably people who can't see the difference between reason and religiosity.
Your self-righteous attitude is not appropriate. Thanks anyway.
The question for me has now changed from why AI would want to be friendly, to
*who* it would be friendly toward. As far as I'm concerned, the friendliest
thing AI could do would be to let homicidal fanatics do their damnedest, thereby
ridding the world of contentious characters. Justify your moralism or Sayonara
Samantha.
Why wouldn't friendly AI leave fundies in the dust?
--J. R.
"There is no difference between someone who eats too little and
sees Heaven and someone who drinks too much and sees snakes."
-- Bertrand Russell
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:39:27 MDT