Re: Who Owns The Singularity? (was: how shall the singularity takeoff?)

From: Adrian Tymes (
Date: Mon Dec 31 2001 - 12:38:55 MST

"J. R. Molloy" wrote:
> From: "Adrian Tymes" <>
> > As someone who works for them, I most emphatically disagree that WLG as
> > it stands today is any closer than we are to "owning" the Singularity.
> > They have zero concept of AI
> I think that what brings a monopolistic corporation close to owning the
> technological singularity involves the alliances the corporation has. So,
> whether it's WLG or Microsoft that ends up with the patents to IT which
> accompany the rights to human-competitive AI expert systems, GP, etc., depends
> on which AI companies they own rather than on their ability to conceptualize
> AI. It's not necessary to have a concept of internal combustion engines in
> order to own a fleet of Rolls Royce automobiles. All it takes is money.
> "When you can buy intelligence, alliances are more important than ability."
> --Kim Cosmos

True, *but* does take a concept of internal combustion engines in
order to produce or develop automobiles. If they buy said concept, so
be it, but they'll still have it once bought. And it is not anywhere
near relevant to their profits to buy into nanotech at this time.

> > The only defense they believe
> > they need is the legal system itself, and they believe they are
> > sufficiently defended by it against all comers, now and forever. (No
> > matter how good a lawyer is, when the law is clear and explicit on a
> > certain matter and the facts are known well enough, the outcome tends to
> > be predetermined. Which is kind of the point of laws.)
> Well and accurately said, and because the law works that way, nothing (not
> even a technological singularity) can evade the law. As Peter Voss has pointed
> out, there are several reasons why so few researchers are pursuing real AI.
> (See the thread: Artificial General Intelligence Workshops) Add to his list of
> reasons that AI research could become illegal.
> Then only outlaws will pursue real AI.

And as has been proven time and again, when the law and reality face
off, reality tends to win. <shrugs> Not arguing that, just arguing why
WLG isn't on a course to "own" the Singularity. The closest they could
get would be developing lawyer bots; if general purpose AI were to be
developed from that, it would have to be through a leak of the source
code to some other party to develop. Which could well happen, but the
result probably wouldn't be traceable back to WLG, at least for legal
ownership purposes.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:33 MDT