On 10/15/06, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...]
> [...]
>
> The main problem is not the commercial one (that once you've finished your AGI, if it's privately held, you can more easily use it to make money). While I like money as much as the next guy, $$ is not the reason to make an AGI. There are other, easier (I'm not saying easy) ways to make money if one wishes to devote many years to the pursuit.
>
> The main problem is the "AGI safety" issue. I am afraid that if details of how to make an AGI are disclosed to the world, then someone else with a lot of $$ for staff and hardware will take the ideas and build an AGI really fast. They might build the AGI solely with a view toward getting their first, with insufficient care to ensuring the outcome is a beneficent one. This scares me.
>
> The main problem is the "AGI safety" issue. I am afraid that if details of how to make an AGI are disclosed to the world, then someone else with a lot of $$ for staff and hardware will take the ideas and build an AGI really fast. They might build the AGI solely with a view toward getting their first, with insufficient care to ensuring the outcome is a beneficent one. This scares me.
Re the open-source issue, I have changed my stance. Before, I tried to force the project to be open-source, but now I think it is OK for it to be closed-source. So we have no disagreement here.
I think the safety issue is independent of whether the project is open- or closed- source. But I'd rather not debate this point, to focus on more practical matters. =)
Commercially, I'm not sure if OS or CS is better. Remember Steve Job's APPLE lost the PC market to IBM because IBM provided a more "open" architecture (in addition to the fact that IBM was more resourceful). We need to be careful not to lose the same way...
Anyway, right now I'd say both OS and CS are OK.
YKY
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
