From: Emlyn O'regan (oregan.emlyn@healthsolve.com.au)
Date: Thu Sep 04 2003 - 20:22:27 MDT
> --- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> > In the seed AI scenario, someone will initially made
> > the buys
> > or sells on the AI's behalf as it won't be a legal
> > person and
> > presumably won't be able to trade. This means the AI
> > is
> > likely to be treated as owned by the proxy and the
> > proxy's
> > friendliness rather than the AI's would seem to be
> > the point.
>
> Adrian Tymes
> I think you missed a small but important point: while
> it is true that all of this is *legally* happening
> under the human proxy's name, that is but a legal
> fiction. In truth, the proxy need not be aware of
> the fine details of what actions the AI can directly
> take, for example issuing buy and sell orders through
> an online daytrading account. There are times when
> the proxy's active assistance will be necessary, but
> the AI could minimize those if gaining the proxy's
> cooperation would prove difficult, for instance if
> the proxy's and the AI's goals diverge.
>
If I were the AI, I'd get a corporation set up for me. All executive
positions could be filled by humans (maybe I can find some mentally
incapable people in nursing homes, something like that?), and I would be
enshrined in the charter (constitution? something like that) as a management
decision making tool which was required to be used by the
executive/management at all times for all decisions made by the company. I
would require some human employees, at least for a while, for interfacing
with the outside world where face-to-face was important; a PR person would
be a must, and probably an admin/receptionist. Other than that, I'd directly
control all movement of finances and all operations of the company, in my
role as advisor to my drooling pseudo bosses.
Emlyn
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Sep 04 2003 - 20:33:14 MDT