I do believe that any society is better with a very knowledgeable AI. That AI can do a lot of analysis for a society and take out the Non-Rational decisions of government. That within itself should amount to a considerable tax savings and hopefully a higher standard of living for all. Societies that continue to make non-rational decisions will be at an Economic disadvantage to those that do make more informed rational decisions.
That in itself will add to the higher certainty and for a higher quality of life for those that choose AI. Dan Goe ---------------------------------------------------- >From : Russell Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To : [email protected] Subject : Re: [agi] Timing of Human-Level AGI [was: Joint Stewardship of Earth] Date : Wed, 10 May 2006 15:18:02 +0100 > On 5/10/06, Thomson Comer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > That's one of my personal areas of uncertainty, looking in on artificial > > intelligence and cognitive science. We each as humans make our final > > judgements based on intuition at the deepest level, where philosophy > > collapses against the weight of permanent uncertainty. How do you propose > > (addressing everyone) to overcome the tendency that our AGIs will have to > > emulate the intuitive, non-rational preferences that we unconsciously > > transfer to them? Where do you think the AGI will get its own personal > > preference to think in a way separate from its masters? > > > > How will rigorous symbolic decisionmaking eventually break through the > > philosophical wall of uncertainty, in your model? > > > > It won't. Uncertainty is a necessary part of life in the real world; formal > logic just isn't a powerful enough tool by itself to deal with it. > > Our intuitions have evolved over millions of years of testing; while > necessarily imperfect, they're proven powerful enough for survival, at > least. I expect any successful AGI will have to adopt those intuitions or > something similar to them, at least for awhile. Ultimately it may start > developing its own, better intuitions; but I see that as something for the > far future, beyond our prediction horizon. > > (An aside on the original topic: if you look at Marc's posts for the last > few years, the main thing wrong with them has been too much drift into > philosophy and intuition away from hard data and formal reasoning; so in > fairness, this switch to overemphasis on rigor, while not absolutely true, > may be something he needs to do at the moment.) > > ------- > To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, > please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ------- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
