I don't get the whole thing as to why people want to live forever. I'll go on record that I don't want to live forever. Maybe if I didn't endure 12 straight years of Washington losing to Oregon! Also, that some other guys are with the women I have loved. We are kind of finite creatures with a definite cycle we run through. Anyway if Nietzsche is right about eternal recurrence (he isn't) don't worry! If it CAN happen it WILL happen.
For now, it is better to concentrate on the not-so far out AGI, instead of the truly far out. These are my opinions (don't parse my post apart and criticize it please, just throw the whole thing out if you don't like it). Mike A On 10/19/15, Telmo Menezes <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 7:23 PM, Steve Richfield > <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Telmo, >> >> On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 6:23 AM, Telmo Menezes <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 8:58 PM, Steve Richfield < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Logan, >>>> >>>> On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 8:50 AM, Logan Streondj <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Cosmism seems to be the religion espoused by top tier AGI researchers. >>>>> Namely Ben Goertzel and Hugo De Garis, though some others have also >>>>> written books about Cosmism recently. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Create-your-own God. Myself, I prefer our present godless world. Heaven >>>> would be SUCH a drag. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> I've always felt my life path was to be a spiritual leader, >>>>> >>>> >>>> Spiritual has to do with what can NOT be presently proven false. >>>> >>> >>> How do you categorize things that are proved to be unprovable (e.g. by >>> Gödel's incompleteness, a formal system cannot prove its own >>> consistency, >>> and I would say this includes the human mind), or uncomputable (e.g. the >>> halting problem)? >>> >> >> You missed my point. While there are MANY things that can NOT be proven >> to >> be TRUE, there are also MANY things that CAN be proven to be FALSE. Most >> importantly, that present religious writings of ALL current religions are >> NOT the product of an omnipotent benevolent God. My proof ONLY covers >> this >> particular point and does NOT address whether any religious writings are >> the product on a demonic God, Aliens, creative people, etc. >> > > I am not defending religion, I am not religious myself. > > What I worry about is that you are a bit too quick with the word "proof". > My view is that only mathematical trues are provable. Science deals in > empiricism, where we have theories and evidence for/against these theories. > > In fact, I strongly dislike religion, this is way I am weary of this > business of "scientific proof" pitted against religion. And when you gaze > long into an abyss the abyss also, etc etc > > >> >> On a side note; in 1994 I was sold into indentured servitude in Saudi >> Arabia. To escape I had to LEARN the Quran - well enough to engage in >> discussions/arguments with experts regarding details therein. I needed a >> good central presumption so I could scan for anything that violated that >> presumption, rather than trying to learn the entire book from scratch in >> just a few days. The presumption that worked for me was that it was >> written >> by a VERY creative social engineer who was addressing problems of 1400 >> years ago, like people eating their children when they ran out of food, >> rather than our present-day problems. >> > > Wow, this is a very interesting story. How did that happen to you? > > >> >> Note here that it is *especially* difficult to prove something TRUE when >> it is in fact FALSE. Religions have been stating that their propositions >> are unproveable for millennia as a device for attracting devotees - but >> apparently I am the first to work on proving them FALSE. The proofs are >> pretty simple - just look for present-day knowledge that is obviously >> MORE >> important than anything in present religions, AND that could still be >> taught to a primitive person of 2,000 years ago. There are several such >> things. Then, ask yourself why an omnipotent benevolent God would choose >> to >> omit such material if he knew it. Two of these things clearly should have >> come from Jesus as better ways of addressing conflict, but for some >> inexplicable reason (if you think there was a God involved in this) Jesus >> never said them. One of them actually WAS said by Mohammad - who then >> failed to realize the value of what he had as a means of debunking the >> Bible, which points the finger of doubt in BOTH directions. >> > > I don't disagree with you about any of this. > > >> >> So, Gödel was right that religions are unproveable, but NOT for the >> reasons he imagined. >> > > On the contrary, he even worked on a proof for the existence of god: > > http://braungardt.trialectics.com/mathematics/mathematicians/kurt-godel/existence-of-god/ > > >> They are unprovably true BECAUSE they are provably FALSE. >> > > > Some things are provably false, sure. For example, god cannot be omniscient > and man have free will at the same time. That is provably false because it > is a logical contradiction. Most things are not provably anything though > --- they are just very unlikely, given the evidence. This is an important > distinction if we are to keep a scientific stance. > > Telmo. > > >> >> Steve >> ================ >> >>> >>> >>>> Now that there are solid proofs that present religions like Judaism, >>>> Christianity, and Islam are false, some people look to AGI. Of course >>>> once >>>> constructed, AGI will no longer be a religion - it will be technology. >>>> >>>> >>>>> and I'm rather interested in the PR of AGI. >>>>> >>>> >>>> What are the bounds on what you call AGI? Does this include uploading? >>>> Downloading? Enhancement of individuals (like you and me) to full AGI >>>> capability? Etc? >>>> >>>> Unless you have thought out these questions VERY carefully - MUCH more >>>> carefully than the people you now cite, PR will bring disaster to AGI >>>> as >>>> others with different opinions react in unfortunate ways. >>>> >>>> >>>>> Having a strong group of people that share the vision of beneficial >>>>> AGI >>>>> future, is conducive to good legislation and funding. >>>>> >>>> >>>> No, the most likely result would be legislation AGAINST a potential >>>> world-ending technology. Just like bathroom atomic experimentation is >>>> now >>>> illegal, AGI research would become illegal. >>>> >>>> However, if you were to "succeed" in attracting "good" legislation and >>>> funding, you would then be up against the situation that SO many have >>>> written about - that there are countless ways that an AGI could destroy >>>> us >>>> all, and NO viable approach to protect us from that - leading to our >>>> eventual doom no matter WHAT we did to delay/avoid that end. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Turing Church and some Transhumanist associations seem to be what is >>>>> available. >>>>> >>>> >>>> What is REALLY needed is a leader pulling people to a more tractable >>>> path. There is WAY too much that is presently unknown about how we work >>>> to >>>> ever program a computer to emulate it, or even understand it, even with >>>> limitless intelligence. >>>> >>>> The one shining light I see is to concentrate on technologies leading >>>> to >>>> downloading - which is why I have put so much effort into a >>>> super-microscope capable of diagramming brains. My hope is that >>>> downloading >>>> outruns the current misdirected wave of people trying to program >>>> computers >>>> to think, so PEOPLE remain in charge, rather than a new specie of >>>> computer >>>> that has NO interest beyond simple curiosity in our preservation. >>>> >>>> In short, given the presence of hazards like Ben and Hugo, downloading >>>> becomes MUCH more than "just" about living forever or making LOTS of >>>> money. >>>> It becomes about saving the human race from the AGI that some fools on >>>> this >>>> forum seek to build. >>>> >>>> Steve >>>> ============= >>>> >>>>> tfgrq >>>>> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >>>>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/10443978-6f4c28ac> | >>>>> Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription >>>>> <http://www.listbox.com> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Full employment can be had with the stoke of a pen. Simply institute a >>>> six hour workday. That will easily create enough new jobs to bring back >>>> full employment. >>>> >>>> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >>>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/25129130-ee4f7d55> | >>>> Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription >>>> <http://www.listbox.com> >>>> >>> >>> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/10443978-6f4c28ac> | >>> Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Your Subscription >>> <http://www.listbox.com> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Full employment can be had with the stoke of a pen. Simply institute a >> six >> hour workday. That will easily create enough new jobs to bring back full >> employment. >> >> *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/25129130-ee4f7d55> | >> Modify >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> >> Your Subscription <http://www.listbox.com> >> > > > > ------------------------------------------- > AGI > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/11943661-d9279dae > Modify Your Subscription: > https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
