From: Chen Yixiong, Eric (email@example.com)
Date: Tue Jan 01 2002 - 10:48:41 MST
<< An interesting related question is what happens when this "universal constitution" governing body attempts to outlaw the
production of real AI? >>
I suggest two things for this effect:
1) we (or another AI friendly group) should start the Federation first
2) the Federation should only impose the minimum rules (i.e. only absolutely neccessary)
>From point 2, we can see that a rule to ban sentient AI would infringe it. Even a rule to ban nuclear weapons or biological weapons
would arguingly also infringe it. A rule to allow free trade would also not qualify (though I would like to see such a rule).
Perhaps we might not even use rules at all.
It should express and enforce the basic premise of "leave me alone and I will leave you alone"; nothing more and nothing less. Do
remember that this treaty has to accommodate to as many possible societies as possible so that it could maximize the benefits to all
sentient life forms. If even Saddam Hussein and the Taliban, as much as most of us dislike them, chose to join the Federation
without breaking the purpose of the Federation, then I would consider it a true success.
The Federation merely consists of a loose collection of communities bound by a very simple treaty of non-intervention. It should not
actually have to "govern" these communities. The United Nations, meanwhile, appears excessively obese by such standards. Again, the
Federation does *not* intend to form some organisation like the UN.
If some political bodies want to kill off sentient AI, then they would have to do it with their own hands (such as by drafting their
own treaties or sending their warships). We should not allow them such a chance.
Could someone get started with this by proposing a draft document that we can write within 2 pages for such a Federation?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 13:37:32 MST