On Friday, September 9, 2022 at 2:10:21 PM UTC-5 jessem wrote: > On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 8:26 AM smitra <[email protected]> wrote: > >> So, I think insect-level AGI will cause a rapid transition to a machine >> civilization. This will lead to a new biology of machines with insect >> level intelligence ending up wiping out all life on Earth due to >> pollution, similar to the great oxygenation event: >> > > Are you assuming insect-level AGI would also be small like insects and > could self-replicate just as rapidly using commonly-found materials as > "nutrients"? If we had insect-level AGI but they were larger and easier to > spot, and also took much longer than an insect to self-replicate (and > perhaps required external infrastructure or uncommon materials to do so), > it seems hard to imagine a scenario in which humanity wouldn't be able to > prevent them from going into runaway self-replication mode. > > I think the possibility of relatively "dumb" self-replicating machines, > even if large and relatively slow like Eric Drexler's concept of a > "clanking replicator" (see > http://wfmh.org.pl/enginesofcreation/EOC_Chapter_4.html ), could disrupt > society for a different reason--they could spell the end of capitalism, or > at least radically change its nature. If there were commercially available > machines that could replicate themselves, those who owned them could make > copies for just the cost of raw materials and energy, and if they were > competing to sell them, competition would tend to drive the cost down to > materials/energy cost or barely above it, basically destroying profits for > any good that isn't forced into artificial scarcity by intellectual > property laws. This would likewise go for any other goods the machines are > capable of replicating. If self-replicating machines could also extract > resources (fully automated mining facilities, say), then profit would still > be possible if raw materials returned > raw materials invested (akin to > 'energy return on energy invested' in energy economics), but if companies > were making profits by just setting up mining machines and then sitting > back and doing nothing, this would probably cause political instability, > both in democracies and autocratic systems, where either the people or the > politicians would likely prefer to be the ones reliably getting back more > than their initial investment with no work needed. Perhaps instead of > totally ending capitalism, we might end up with a hybrid system where some > sort of intellectual property laws would still be in place so companies and > individuals could still profit from those, but actual production machinery > would mostly be publicly owned, and people (along with retail companies) > could order up any good from a database of designs, receiving something > like a basic income in raw materials and energy (funded by mining and > energy generation facilities which could also be publicly owned). > > Arthur C. Clarke, in his 1962 nonfiction book Profiles of the Future, > commented about how a self-replicating machine which could also replicate > other goods, which he just called a "Replicator", would disrupt our current > economic system: > > "The advent of the Replicator would mean the end of all factories, and > perhaps all transportation of raw materials and all farming. The entire > structure of industry and commerce, as it is now organized, would cease to > exist. Every family would produce all that it needed on the spot — as, > indeed, it has had to do throughout most of human history. The present > machine era of mass-production would then be seen as a brief interregnum > between two far longer periods of self-sufficiency, and the only valuable > item of exchange would be matrices, or recordings, which had to be inserted > into the Replicator to control its creations. > > "No one who has read thus far will, I hope, argue that the Replicator > would itself be so expensive that nobody could possibly afford it. The > prototype, it is true, is hardly likely to cost less than > £1,000,000,000,000 spread over a few centuries of time. The second model > would cost nothing, because the Replicator's first job would be to produce > other Replicators. It is perhaps relevant to point out that in 1951 the > great mathematician, John von Neumann, established the important principle > that a machine could always be designed to build any describable machine -- > including itself. The human race has squalling proof of this several > hundred thousand times a day. > > "A society based on the Replicator would be so completely different from > ours that the present debate between Capitalism and Communism would become > quite meaningless. All material possessions would be literally cheap as > dirt. Soiled handkerchiefs, diamond tiaras, Mona Lisas totally > indistinguishable from the original, once-worn mink stoles, half-consumed > bottles of the most superb champagnes – all would go back into the hopper > when they were no longer required. Even the furniture in the house of the > future might cease to exist when it was not actually in use.” > > Probably this book was a major influence on Gene Roddenberry's vision of a > post-scarcity future in Star Trek, see his comments quoted at > https://arthurcclarke.org/site/how-arthur-c-clarke-helped-save-star-trek/ > where he specifically references Profiles of the Future. For a more > cyberpunk depiction of how fully automated self-replicating machinery could > lead to a transition to a new kind of economic system, I recommend Cory > Doctorow's recent sci fi novel "Walkaway". > > Jesse >
All of that would require an enormous amount of energy. That is one thing that would put a limit on this. LC > > > > >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Oxidation_Event >> >> And as I pointed out earlier, I think this is a universal phenomena that >> all intelligent life is subject to. The whole point of being intelligent >> is to let as much of the work be done for you by entities that are >> dumber than you. But in that process that leads to faster and faster >> economic growth, its inevitable that at some point you are going to >> crate autonomous systems that will grow exponentially. The point where >> the transition to artificial life starts is going to be close to the >> minimum intelligence level needed for exponential growth. >> >> If you make it hotter and hotter in some closed space, a fire will break >> out, this is going to happen close to the minimum required temperature >> for ignition, not at some extremely high value for the temperature. >> Nature shows us that the minimum amount of intelligence required for >> efficient self-maintenance and reproduction that yields exponential >> growth is very low. >> >> Saibal >> >> >> >> >> >> On 08-09-2022 14:09, John Clark wrote: >> > This is an interview of the great computer programmer John Carmack, he >> > thinks the time when computers can do everything, not just some >> > things, as good or better than humans is much closer than most people >> > believe, he thinks there is a 60% chance it will happen by 2030. Like >> > me Carmack is much more interested in intelligence than consciousness >> > and has no interest in the "philosophical zombie" argument. As far as >> > the future history of the human race is concerned the following >> > quotation is particularly relevant: >> > >> > "___It seems to me this is the highest leverage moment for a single >> > individual potentially_ _in the history of the world._ [...] _I am >> > not a mad man in saying that the code for artificial General >> > intelligence is going to be tens of thousands of lines of code, not >> > millions of lines of code. This is code that conceivably one >> > individual could write, unliker writing a new web browser or operating >> > system._" >> > >> > The code for AGI will be simple [1] >> > >> > John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis [2] >> > >> > b30 >> > >> > -- >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> > Groups "Everything List" group. >> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >> > an email to [email protected]. >> > To view this discussion on the web visit >> > >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv3ZEbXXVjs803%3Dutjc2pvkCgpZGA%2Bad_OWBhue-5kxDJQ%40mail.gmail.com >> > [3]. >> > >> > >> > Links: >> > ------ >> > [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLi83prR5fg >> > [2] https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis >> > [3] >> > >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv3ZEbXXVjs803%3Dutjc2pvkCgpZGA%2Bad_OWBhue-5kxDJQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Everything List" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> > To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/d4b54074fe283e5c198ff6a6d709b143%40zonnet.nl >> . >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/bf5f67c4-b319-459e-8eae-d8c4a4fd271an%40googlegroups.com.
