On 2015-10-21 10:32, Bill Hibbard wrote:
The New York Times, Washington Post and Huffington
Post didn't want this, minus its last paragraph, as
an op-ed:
https://sites.google.com/site/whibbard/g/transparency
The wealth of those who profit from machine intelligence rests partly
on their ability to resist others copying their stuff. Their weapons
include copyright, patents, contracts and secrecy. With server-side code,
copyright and patent law don't offer very much in the way of practical
defense - and companies routinely attempt to keep their code secret.
Greater transparency would probably lead to weaker protection, fewer
secrets and technical leadership with less funds. Who would benefit?
Practically everyone else. However, 'everyone else' has a global
distribution - and so the result would probably be to weaken the
more transparent country - relative to other players.
Greater transparency is probably coming - with the advent of cheap
ubiquitous sensors - however, I think it is possible to see why
there's so much resistance to it.
--
__________
|im Tyler http://timtyler.org/
-------------------------------------------
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
