Re: Who'd submit to the benevolent dictatorship of GAI anyway?

From: Brett Paatsch (bpaatsch@bigpond.net.au)
Date: Sat Sep 06 2003 - 01:04:28 MDT

  • Next message: Spike: "RE: SPACE: Loss of the Saturn V"

    Emlyn writes:

    > I think you've mistaken me for someone who thinks
    > friendliness is doable.

    My apologies then. I'm beginning to wonder if anyone
    thinks friendliness is doable and if it isn't perhaps we'd
    do well to recognize that.

    [Emlyn]
    > This is all individuals and small groups acting on their
    > own cognisance; nobody else gets a vote at this stage.

    Yep incrementally developed AI, multiple locations,
    no rapid take off effect on the singularity. Similar to
    Anders view (as I understand it).

    But the US govt (I'm not picking on it, it is just the big
    one at present) can do quite a comprehensive survey
    of developing AI projects presumably and possible
    classify some private sector work that seeks patents
    or it otherwise becomes aware off, (all in the "national
    interest" of course - not being facetious here - well
    not completely).

    In such a way a well resourced govt dept might be able
    to come up with an AI that is a substantial increment
    on what else is around as they are *both* well resourced
    and have access to all the public domain stuff and need
    not share what they (the govt dept) knows.

    I think there are some precedents for this in the
    development of computers to crack Enigma, and in a
    sort of RSA encryption from memory. (see Simon
    Singh's: The Code Book).

    <snip>
     
    > > > 3 - The enslaved AI is simply so damned good
    > > > at running a company that more and more decision
    > > > making functions are delegated to it over time;
    > > > management automation.

    <snip>
     
    > > > Note that in this last case, the management
    > > > automation software need not even be self aware,
    > > > just really good at what it does.
    >
    > AI might even emerge from cobbled together, ever more
    > skilled expert systems and other AI-ish bits and pieces.
    > Drexler talks about this, doesn't he?

    He may. I don't think of Drexler as the AI guy. To me he's
    "the MNT guy", but he may.

    Regards,
    Brett



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Sep 06 2003 - 01:13:48 MDT