In a message dated 99-07-11 17:56:47 EDT, email@example.com (Robert J. Bradbury) wrote:
> The critical question to my mind is whether there are
> "evolutionary plateaus" or "ecological niches" that are likely to
> be filled by sub-SIs. If it is *sentient* and it can self-evolve,
> then we are back to the Robots discussion (of another thread) --
> why would it not choose not to evolve as far as it possibly can
> (and gobble up another star...)? Unless the Supreme SI(s) punish
> self-evolving behavior rather severely it would seem that it must occur.
Paradise Lost . . . Lucifer . . .
(I am getting entirely too carried away with this, I think . . .)
Greg Burch <GBurch1@aol.com>----<firstname.lastname@example.org> Attorney ::: Vice President, Extropy Institute ::: Wilderness Guide http://users.aol.com/gburch1 -or- http://members.aol.com/gburch1 "Civilization is protest against nature; progress requires us to take control of evolution." -- Thomas Huxley