Dan Clemmensen wrote:
> continuum. We can of course attempt to guess where the SI will be along this
> continuum or how it will evolve along this continuum. First, I think we need
> to decide how likely it is that an SI is restricted to this continuum at all.
> It looks like the typical oversimplified bipolar mapping of a multivarate
> space to me, sort of like Myers-Brigg.
I also think it's an oversimplified bipolar mapping, but of a nonvariate space, rather than a multivariate. In other words, I am not sure that there exists a valid distinction between "many" and "one". Functions have inputs and outputs. Modules of the human brain have inputs and outputs. How is this distinguishable from "individual" and "environment"? When does a module stop being a visual cortex and start being a human? That was my question - what kind of functionality was involved.
For what it's worth, my guess is that there will not be duplicated calculations or module-based programming, at least if efficiency is being maximized. If individuals exist, it will be because of moral concerns overriding efficiency, or because maximal efficiency cannot be achieved due to constraints on global interprocess communication such as lightspeed limits or barriers between Universes.
Two things to consider:
1) There's a lot of duplicated processing in the human race. Is it really necessary to have five billion copies of the walking algorithm? 2) Ideal efficiency requires that there be only one Post-Singularity Entity, among all the races of all the Universes.
-- firstname.lastname@example.org Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://pobox.com/~sentience/AI_design.temp.html http://pobox.com/~sentience/sing_analysis.html Disclaimer: Unless otherwise specified, I'm not telling you everything I think I know.