David Noziglia wrote:
> It is a common belief that game theory has shown that it is
> advantageous to
> be selfish and nasty.  I assume that the members of this group
> know that is
> wrong, that game theory has in fact shown that in a situation of repeated
> interaction, it is more advantageous from a strictly self-interested
> viewpoint to make nice and cooperate.  This is a simplistic description of
> the Nash Equilibrium.
>
> Of course, Smith's Evolutionarily Stable Sets then show that there are
> situations when betrayal then becomes of greater advantage to an
> individual,
> so we can't count on a Nash calculation to lead any and all AGI's to make
> nice and keep their human companions comfortable.

These are all interesting and important results.

However, I think you'll agree that the situation of a group of agents, some
of which are improving their intelligence and modifying their nature
dramatically at a rapid pace [the likely situation with future AGI's], is a
bit different from the assumptions underlying the simulations you mention...
!!

ben

-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, 
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/

Reply via email to