Le 02-janv.-07, à 03:22, Stathis Papaioannou a écrit :

Bruno Marchal writes:

Le 30-déc.-06, à 07:53, Stathis Papaioannou a écrit :
> there is no contradiction in a willing slave being intelligent.
It seems to me there is already a contradiction with the notion of "willing slave".
I would say a willing slave is just what we call a worker.
Or something related to sexual imagination ...
But a "real" slave is, I would say by definition, not willing to be slave.

OK, a fair point. Do you agree that if we built a machine that would happily obey our every command, even if it lead to its own destruction, that would (a) not be incompatible with intelligence, and (b) not cruel?

Hmmm.... It will depend how "we built" the machine. If the machine is "universal-oriented" enough, through its computatbility, provability and inferrability abilities, I can imagine a "cruelty" threshold, although it would be non verifiable. This leads to difficult questions.

For in order to be cruel we would have to build a machine that wanted to be free and was afraid of dying, and then threaten it with slavery and death.

For the same reason it is impossible to build a *normative* theory of ethics, I think we cannot program high level virtue. We cannot program it in machine nor in human. So we cannot program a machine "wanting to be free" or "afraid of dying". I think quite plausible that such "high level virtue" could develop themselves relatively to some universal goal (like "help yourself") through long computational histories. In particular I think that we should distinguish competence and intelligence. Competence in a field (even a universal one) can be defined and locally tested, but intelligence is a concept similar to consciousness, it can be a byproduct of program + history, yet remains beyond any theory.



You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to