Kevin wrote: > The important thing is to avoid DARPA getting it before everyone > else does. > The ***only*** way to do this is to avoid accepting funding from them. If > this means that it takes 5 more years to develop, then so be it. If it > means that you have to flip burgers by day, and code by night, then so be > it. If someone makes a deal with the devil, they are only going > to receive > a bad result.
This is not a major current issue for me, in the sense that I have no pending funding applications with DARPA, and they haven't called me up offering cash. However, I don't see why accepting DARPA funding for AGI means that the military will necessarily get one's AGI before anyone else. If the DARPA funding is for a non-secret project, then one has the freedom to use the software elsewhere simultaneously with DARPA doing what it likes with the software (i.e. passing it along to the defense community). In fact, DARPA has funded plenty of research that has proved more useful in the outside world than in the defense community.... One factor here is that there is a bureaucracy in the defense community that often proves a barrier to the adoption of new technologies, even ones that are developed via DARPA and other defense-related funding. A more accurate statement, in my view, would be: "Accepting DARPA funding makes the military aware of one's technology, hence making them more likely to use it; and it may possibly have adverse effects in terms of causing one to ignore other applications of the technology, or to later move into secretive, classified applications of one's technology." -- Ben G ------- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?[EMAIL PROTECTED]
