Eliezer S. Yudkowsky seems to be the only person here willing to defend
"explosive growth," by which I mean sudden very rapid world economic growth.
So I'd like to see what his best argument is for this. But Eliezer, if we're going to make any progress, we're going to have to *focus*. I don't want to wander off on a dozen irrelevant tangents.
So first, please make clear which (if any) other intelligence growth processes you will accept as relevant analogies. These include the evolution of the biosphere, recent world economic growth, human and animal learning, the adaptation of corporations to new environments, the growth of cities, the domestication of animals, scientific progress, AI research progress, advances in computer hardware, or the experience of specific computer learning programs.
You seemed to say no analogies are relevant, and then your last response to me touches on AI, learning general relativity, Cro-Magnons, Lamarkian biology, the rise of cities, and many other topics. I don't want to talk about these things if they are tangential to your argument.
If no analogies are relevant, and so this is all theory driven, can the theory be stated concisely? If not, where did you get the theory you use? Does anyone else use it, and what can be its empirical support, if analogies are irrelevant?
firstname.lastname@example.org http://hanson.berkeley.edu/ RWJF Health Policy Scholar, Sch. of Public Health 510-643-1884 140 Warren Hall, UC Berkeley, CA 94720-7360 FAX: 510-643-8614