On Wed, Oct 10, 2007 at 01:22:26PM -0400, Richard Loosemore wrote:
Am I the only one, or does anyone else agree that politics/political
theorising is not appropriate on the AGI list?
Yes, and I'm sorry I triggred the thread.
I particularly object to libertarianism being shoved down our
On 10/10/2007, Richard Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am I the only one, or does anyone else agree that politics/political
theorising is not appropriate on the AGI list?
Agreed. There are many other forums where political ideology can be debated.
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI:
I also agree except ... I think political and economic theories can inform AGI
design, particularly in areas of AGI decision making and
friendliness/roboethics. I wasn't familiar with the theory of Comparative
Advantage until Josh and Eric brought it up. (Josh discusses in conjunction
with
Yes, I think that too.
On the practical side, I think that investing in AGI requires
significant tax cuts, and we should elect a candidate that would do that
(Ron Paul). I think that the government has to have more respect to
potential weapons (like AGI), so we should elect a candidate who is
The only solution to this problem I ever see suggested is to
intentionally create a Really Big Fish called the government that can
effortlessly eat every fish in the pond but promises not to -- to
prevent the creation of Really Big Fish. That is quite the Faustian
bargain to protect
BillK On 10/6/07, a wrote:
I am skeptical that economies follow the self-organized criticality
behavior. There aren't any examples. Some would cite the Great
Depression, but it was caused by the malinvestment created by
Central Banks. e.g. The Federal Reserve System. See the Austrian
On Oct 10, 2007, at 2:26 AM, Robert Wensman wrote:
Yes, of course, the Really Big Fish that is democracy.
No, you got this quite wrong. The Really Big Fish is institution
responsible for governance (usually the government); democracy is
merely a fuzzy category of rule set used in
Am I the only one, or does anyone else agree that politics/political
theorising is not appropriate on the AGI list?
I particularly object to libertarianism being shoved down our throats,
not so much because I disagree with it, but because so much of the
singularity / extropian / futurist
(off topic, but there are something relevant for AGI)
My fears about economical libertarianism could be illustrated with a fish
pond analogy. If there is a small pond with a large number of small fish of
some predatory species, after an amount of time they will cannibalize and
eat each other
On Oct 9, 2007, at 4:27 AM, Robert Wensman wrote:
This is of course just an illustration and by no means a proof that
the same thing would occur in a laissez-faire/libertarianism
economy. Libertarians commonly put blame for monopolies on
government involvement, and I guess some would
J. Andrew Rogers wrote:
Generally though, the point that you fail to see is that an AGI can
just as easily subvert *any* power structure, whether the environment
is a libertarian free market or an autocratic communist state. The
problem has nothing to do with the governance of the
Economic libertarianism would be nice if it were to occur. However,
in practice companies and governments put in place all sorts of
anti-competitive structures to lock people into certain modes of
economic activity. I think economic activity in general is heavily
influenced by cognitive biases
a wrote:
Linas Vepstas wrote:
...
The issue is that there's no safety net protecting against avalanches
of unbounded size. The other issue is that its not grains of sand, its
people. My bank-account and my brains can insulate me from small
shocks.
I'd like to have protection against the
Bob Mottram wrote:
Economic libertarianism would be nice if it were to occur. However,
in practice companies and governments put in place all sorts of
anti-competitive structures to lock people into certain modes of
economic activity. I think economic activity in general is heavily
influenced
On Sat, Oct 06, 2007 at 10:05:28AM -0400, a wrote:
I am skeptical that economies follow the self-organized criticality
behavior.
Oh. Well, I thought this was a basic principle, commonly cited in
microeconomics textbooks: when there's a demand, producers rush
to fill the demand. When there's
Linas Vepstas wrote:
My objection to economic libertarianism is its lack of discussion of
self-organized criticality. A common example of self-organized
criticality is a sand-pile at the critical point. Adding one grain
of sand can trigger an avalanche, which can be small, or maybe
On 10/6/07, a wrote:
I am skeptical that economies follow the self-organized criticality
behavior.
There aren't any examples. Some would cite the Great Depression, but it
was caused by the malinvestment created by Central Banks. e.g. The
Federal Reserve System. See the Austrian Business Cycle
OK, this is very off-topic. Sorry.
On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 06:36:34PM -0400, a wrote:
Linas Vepstas wrote:
For the most part, modern western culture espouses and hews to
physical non-violence. However, modern right-leaning pure capitalism
advocates not only social Darwinism, but also the
18 matches
Mail list logo
