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

From: Adrian Tymes (wingcat@pacbell.net)
Date: Wed Sep 03 2003 - 15:34:29 MDT

  • Next message: Charles Hixson: "Re: tribal violence (was: RE: would you vote for this man?)"

    --- Samantha Atkins <samantha@objectent.com> wrote:
    > On Tuesday 02 September 2003 02:56, Brett Paatsch
    > wrote:
    > > Personally, I don't see myself doing so
    > *voluntarily*
    > > especially when any benevolence, real or alleged
    > > would be a matter still to be determined at least
    > so
    > > far as I was concerned.
    > >
    > > Or am I missing the point here? How *would* a
    > single
    > > super general AI actually benefit? Would it have
    > *no*
    > > political power but say instantly suggest optimal
    > game
    > > theoretical solutions to otherwise intractable
    > problems
    > > or is it the super inventor that cares nothing for
    > intellectual
    > > property rights?
    >
    > I am having trouble parsing what you might mean by
    > either of those categories.

    He's wondering how an essentially disembodied brain,
    no matter how hyper-intelligent, could even begin to
    take over the world.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 03 2003 - 15:50:40 MDT