From: Brett Paatsch (bpaatsch@bigpond.net.au)
Date: Mon Aug 11 2003 - 22:23:44 MDT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" <sentience@pobox.com>
To: <extropians@extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 2:04 PM
Subject: Re: Is this safe/prudent ? (was Re: Perl AI Weblog)
> Brett Paatsch wrote:
> >
> > If I was a socially dysfunctional programming wiz with a burning
> > desire to make my own avenging bot to settle some scores
> > would not this sort of open source open sharing empower me
> > in dangerous ways.
>
> Arthur Murray is a harmless crank, far as I know.
>
> > Any thoughts on this sort of approach from a public
> > policy stance Eliezer? Anyone?
>
> Don't open-source an AI that can potentially be corrupted and that can
> accomplish more damage than uncorrupted AIs can correct. If you're in a
> state where a corrupted version of your AI can do serious global damage,
> then don't open-source that AI.
That sound very sensible to me, but then I have the additional thought,
the military, even in the West can read everything that's in the public
domain, not share the benefits of work taken further or generally have
to be accountable. They just declare national security. It may be damn
hard to get friendly AI up first with the military wanting fierce attack
dog AI that bites whoever it is pointed at without question.
Regards,
Brett
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Aug 11 2003 - 22:30:30 MDT