Re: Request to form 'Social Contract' with SAI

2007-10-26 Thread marc . geddes

Danny,

The depressed people are the sane ones.  My post is merely
'existential angst' caused by knowledge of the world and myself as I
really am.With knowledge comes unhappiness and happiness is the
happiness of ignorance.

Ever read the short story of 'Green Magic'?  That story is available
on-line:
http://www.infinityplus.co.uk/stories/green.htm

I am like 'Howard Fair' and I suffered the same fate in the story that
he did.

---

Where do you go? Fair asked in wonder and longing. May I go with
you?

The sprite, swirling a drape of bright green dust over its shoulders,
shook his head. You would be less than comfortable.

Other men have explored the worlds of magic!

True: your uncle Gerald McIntyre, for instance.

My uncle Gerald learned green magic?

To the limit of his capabilities. He found no pleasure in his
learning. You would do well to profit by his experience and modify
your ambitions. The sprite turned and walked away.




Jaadian assented. You have not accepted my advice.

Fair shrugged. You asked me to remain ignorant, to accept my
stupidity and ineptitude.

And why should you not? asked Jaadian gently. You are a primitive
in a primitive realm; nevertheless not one man in a thousand can match
your achievements.

Fair agreed, smiling faintly. But knowledge creates a craving for
further knowledge. Where is the harm in knowledge?



By stages so gradual he never realized them he learned green magic.

But the new faculty gave him no pride: between his crude ineptitudes
and the poetic elegance of the sprites remained a tremendous gap, and
he felt his innate inferiority much more keenly than he ever had in
his old state. Worse, his most earnest efforts failed to improve his
technique, and sometimes, observing the singing joy of an improvised
manifestation by one of the sprites, and contrasting it to his own
labored constructions, he felt futility and shame.



In one terrible bittersweet spasm, he gave up. He found Jaadian
weaving tinkling fragments of various magics into a warp of shining
long splines. With grave courtesy, Jaadian gave Fair his attention,
and Fair laboriously set forth his meaning.

Jaadian returned a message. I recognize your discomfort, and extend
my sympathy. It is best that you now return to your native home.

-

Howard Fair sat in his apartment. His perceptions, augmented and
sharpened by his sojourn in the green realm, took note of the
surroundings. Only two hours before, by the clocks of Earth, he had
found them both restful and stimulating; now they were neither. His
books: superstition, spuriousness, earnest nonsense. His private
journals and workbooks: a pathetic scrawl of infantilisms. Gravity
tugged at his feet, held him rigid. The shoddy construction of the
house, which heretofore he never had noticed, oppressed him.
Everywhere he looked he saw slipshod disorder, primitive filth. The
thought of the food he must now eat revolted him.



... Sometimes I wish I could abandon all my magic and return to my
former innocence.

I have toyed with the idea, McIntyre replied thoughtfully. In fact
I have made all the necessary arrangements. It is really a simple
matter. He led Fair to a small room behind the station. Although the
door was open, the interior showed a thick darkness.

McIntyre, standing well back, surveyed the darkness with a quizzical
curl to his lip. You need only enter. All your magic, all your
recollections of the green realm will depart. You will be no wiser
than the next man you meet. And with your knowledge will go your
boredom, your melancholy, your dissatisfaction.

Fair contemplated the dark doorway. A single step would resolve his
discomfort.

He glanced at McIntyre; the two surveyed each other with sardonic
amusement. They returned to the front of the building.




--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



Re: Request to form 'Social Contract' with SAI

2007-10-26 Thread David Nyman

On Oct 26, 8:30 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Ever read the short story of 'Green Magic'?

No I hadn't, but thanks for the link, marc - it's a neat little tale,
delightfully told.  I'm tempted to try a little more of Jack Vance
after this - any suggestions?

David

On Oct 26, 8:30 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Danny,

 The depressed people are the sane ones.  My post is merely
 'existential angst' caused by knowledge of the world and myself as I
 really am.With knowledge comes unhappiness and happiness is the
 happiness of ignorance.

 Ever read the short story of 'Green Magic'?  That story is available
 on-line:http://www.infinityplus.co.uk/stories/green.htm

 I am like 'Howard Fair' and I suffered the same fate in the story that
 he did.

 ---

 Where do you go? Fair asked in wonder and longing. May I go with
 you?

 The sprite, swirling a drape of bright green dust over its shoulders,
 shook his head. You would be less than comfortable.

 Other men have explored the worlds of magic!

 True: your uncle Gerald McIntyre, for instance.

 My uncle Gerald learned green magic?

 To the limit of his capabilities. He found no pleasure in his
 learning. You would do well to profit by his experience and modify
 your ambitions. The sprite turned and walked away.

 

 Jaadian assented. You have not accepted my advice.

 Fair shrugged. You asked me to remain ignorant, to accept my
 stupidity and ineptitude.

 And why should you not? asked Jaadian gently. You are a primitive
 in a primitive realm; nevertheless not one man in a thousand can match
 your achievements.

 Fair agreed, smiling faintly. But knowledge creates a craving for
 further knowledge. Where is the harm in knowledge?

 

 By stages so gradual he never realized them he learned green magic.

 But the new faculty gave him no pride: between his crude ineptitudes
 and the poetic elegance of the sprites remained a tremendous gap, and
 he felt his innate inferiority much more keenly than he ever had in
 his old state. Worse, his most earnest efforts failed to improve his
 technique, and sometimes, observing the singing joy of an improvised
 manifestation by one of the sprites, and contrasting it to his own
 labored constructions, he felt futility and shame.

 

 In one terrible bittersweet spasm, he gave up. He found Jaadian
 weaving tinkling fragments of various magics into a warp of shining
 long splines. With grave courtesy, Jaadian gave Fair his attention,
 and Fair laboriously set forth his meaning.

 Jaadian returned a message. I recognize your discomfort, and extend
 my sympathy. It is best that you now return to your native home.

 -

 Howard Fair sat in his apartment. His perceptions, augmented and
 sharpened by his sojourn in the green realm, took note of the
 surroundings. Only two hours before, by the clocks of Earth, he had
 found them both restful and stimulating; now they were neither. His
 books: superstition, spuriousness, earnest nonsense. His private
 journals and workbooks: a pathetic scrawl of infantilisms. Gravity
 tugged at his feet, held him rigid. The shoddy construction of the
 house, which heretofore he never had noticed, oppressed him.
 Everywhere he looked he saw slipshod disorder, primitive filth. The
 thought of the food he must now eat revolted him.

 

 ... Sometimes I wish I could abandon all my magic and return to my
 former innocence.

 I have toyed with the idea, McIntyre replied thoughtfully. In fact
 I have made all the necessary arrangements. It is really a simple
 matter. He led Fair to a small room behind the station. Although the
 door was open, the interior showed a thick darkness.

 McIntyre, standing well back, surveyed the darkness with a quizzical
 curl to his lip. You need only enter. All your magic, all your
 recollections of the green realm will depart. You will be no wiser
 than the next man you meet. And with your knowledge will go your
 boredom, your melancholy, your dissatisfaction.

 Fair contemplated the dark doorway. A single step would resolve his
 discomfort.

 He glanced at McIntyre; the two surveyed each other with sardonic
 amusement. They returned to the front of the building.


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



Re: Request to form 'Social Contract' with SAI

2007-10-26 Thread Russell Standish

On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 07:30:30AM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
 Danny,
 
 The depressed people are the sane ones.  My post is merely
 'existential angst' caused by knowledge of the world and myself as I
 really am.With knowledge comes unhappiness and happiness is the
 happiness of ignorance.
 

I don't think it has to be that way at all. What people seem to find
depressing in all of this, and go running to the gods of their
parents to get away from, I tend to find fascinating.

Is this the same story as Zaphod Beeblebrox and the Total Perspective
Vortex (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_Perspective_Vortex)?

Cheers
-- 


A/Prof Russell Standish  Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Mathematics  
UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Australiahttp://www.hpcoders.com.au


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



Re: Request to form 'Social Contract' with SAI

2007-10-24 Thread Bruno Marchal


Le 20-oct.-07, à 18:06, David Nyman a écrit :


 On Oct 19, 2:26 pm, Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 David, do you mind if I send next week your solution (which were
 correct) of the exercises I gave online once to the list?   I am sure
 it could help some other. All that  is needed to get Church's thesis
 eventually right. Recall that Church thesis is one half of COMP.


 Just saw this.  Sure, no problem.




Thanks. So I will answer the question below asap. I have a bit more 
time next week, so I think I will able to do it soon,


For the other I recall that a good understanding of Cantor 
diagonalization (the point of those exercises) is needed to, not only 
grasp Church thesis (which is 1/2 of comp), but to grasp the impact of 
Church thesis in the science in general.

Thanks again for your patience,

Bruno




 On Oct 16, 11:37 pm, Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  If it is ''a'-rtificial' I question the 'natural one' (following
 Bruno's fear of the (natural?) 'super stupidity'.) Yet I don't 
 think
 Marc wants to let himself denature into an artifact.

 Not necessarily, but look at Saibal's recent answer!
 This raises a question for Mark. What if the future SAI, SI
 should we say, are computationalist? Marc, is it ok if those SI
 reincarnate you digitally? Could they decide without your consent
 (without being super-stupid?).

 Your points are well taken Bruno.  We should be highly suspicious of
 any 'authority' that thinks to act without our consent.

 As for cryonics, Saibal , I think it's a good option.  If necessary,
 I'm quite prepared to put myself in the freezer - I have no intention
 of getting any older than a biological age of 65 - if I live that 
 long
 I might be the first guy in the world to volunteer for a 'live
 freeze' (I would probably have to move to a country where there are
 laws allowing for assisted suicide though!)

 Again, not necessarily. Buddhism, unlike Christianity, has always 
 been
 very aware that religious truth, once institutionalized get 
 wrong
 ...
 To kill the buddha, or sompetimes just the master, is a way to 
 remind
 the monk that they have to find the truth in themsleves and never to
 take any master talk for granted.

 In our (definition-wise) lower mentality it is not likely that we 
 can
 'kill' the smarter. So the condition involves the un-possibility,
 even
 if we are capable to recognise them
  - what we are not likely to be.

 Agreed. It was just a parabola for driving attention against any use
 of
 authoritative argument in the field of fundamentals.
 Ah! But the lobian machine too can be shown allergic to such 
 argument.
 It's a universal dissident. Unforunately, humans, like dog are still
 attracted to the practical philosophy according to which the boss 
 is
 right (especially when wrong!)

 Bruno

 PS Perhaps this week I will got the time to send the next post in 
 the
 observer-moment = Sigma_1 sentence.

 Well, I'm pleased to hear the lobian machine is a 'universal
 dissident'.  I wouldn't want to imply that 'the boss is right'.  All 
 I
 was implying was that (in the case of super-intelligence) the boss
 would be *stronger*.  Whether the boss is right or not, we little 
 guys
 wouldn't have much power so our negotiating power would be seriously
 limited initally.  The best that could be hoped for from such a
 hypothetical 'social contract' in the beginning is that the SI 
 doesn't
 hurt us.

 OK.

 You know I am confident that real SI would not hurt you, except by
 accident. The problem is that we cannot distinguished real SI from
 real SI, er I mean real super-intelligent (Sintel) from real
 super-idiot (Sidiot).

 I guess that is why democracy, when it is normally functioning,  is 
 the
 best of the system, allowing to change your mind about the people we
 are delegating power to.(by democracy I mean mainly here:
 education + repeated  well organized election).

 Note that normally real SIntell will never present themselves as
 SIntell, only real Sidiot would do that. So, although,  there does
 not exist a way to test Super intelligence , there are some cases 
 where
 we can  be almost sure to be in front of Super-stupidity ...

 Good week-end Marc, and All,(please revise the notion of 
 bijection.
 Are everybody convinced that N is in bijection with N X N, and with N 
 X
 N X N X N X... ?

 David, do you mind if I send next week your solution (which were
 correct) of the exercises I gave online once to the list?   I am sure
 it could help some other. All that  is needed to get Church's thesis
 eventually right. Recall that Church thesis is one half of COMP.

 Bruno

 http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/


 

http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Request to form 'Social Contract' with SAI

2007-10-22 Thread Danny Mayes

Heh.  Bruno, I continue to analyse my current (human) condition to try to
find a way out of this mess (I'm not a happy bloke).  Still considering many
possibilities.

Maybe I am misreading you here, but you sound pretty depressed. If so, don't
just wait around hoping for things to get better, get help.  I have been
amazed at the results I have seen in people who simply get on the right
meds.  Or if meds aren't your thing, find somebody to talk to; get a
therapist.  It really can make a big difference.

Again Marc, if you were just being a little dramatic my apologies, but I
have had many clients who have been severely depressed and the worst thing
is to do nothing and just hope it gets better.   

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 1:17 AM
To: Everything List
Subject: Re: Request to form 'Social Contract' with SAI




On Oct 14, 3:39 am, Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


 Take care, trust yourself and kill all the SAI on the road, to
 paraphrase a well known Buddhist idea. Either you are sufficiently
 clever to understand the SAI arguments, showing you are already an SAI
 yourself, and your message is without purpose, or you are not, in which
 case, to keep soundness (by lobianity), you better be skeptical, (and
 not to abide so quick imo).

 Unless you want to loose your universality, and be a slave, a tool.

 Bruno

 http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/

Heh.  Bruno, I continue to analyse my current (human) condition to try
to find a way out of this mess (I'm not a happy bloke).  Still
considering many possibilities.  Given the possibility that super-
intelligences do already (or will in the future) exist,  there's a
chance that a non-interference policy is being/will be pursued, but
that there's a way to get their attention - it could be a simple
matter of indicating that you are aware of the possibility and
requesting to 'sign' a 'social contract'.  Get in early now! ;)





--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



Re: Request to form 'Social Contract' with SAI

2007-10-20 Thread David Nyman

On Oct 19, 2:26 pm, Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 David, do you mind if I send next week your solution (which were
 correct) of the exercises I gave online once to the list?   I am sure
 it could help some other. All that  is needed to get Church's thesis
 eventually right. Recall that Church thesis is one half of COMP.


Just saw this.  Sure, no problem.

David


 Le 17-oct.-07, à 08:16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :





  On Oct 16, 11:37 pm, Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

   If it is ''a'-rtificial' I question the 'natural one' (following
  Bruno's fear of the (natural?) 'super stupidity'.) Yet I don't think
  Marc wants to let himself denature into an artifact.

  Not necessarily, but look at Saibal's recent answer!
  This raises a question for Mark. What if the future SAI, SI
  should we say, are computationalist? Marc, is it ok if those SI
  reincarnate you digitally? Could they decide without your consent
  (without being super-stupid?).

  Your points are well taken Bruno.  We should be highly suspicious of
  any 'authority' that thinks to act without our consent.

  As for cryonics, Saibal , I think it's a good option.  If necessary,
  I'm quite prepared to put myself in the freezer - I have no intention
  of getting any older than a biological age of 65 - if I live that long
  I might be the first guy in the world to volunteer for a 'live
  freeze' (I would probably have to move to a country where there are
  laws allowing for assisted suicide though!)

  Again, not necessarily. Buddhism, unlike Christianity, has always been
  very aware that religious truth, once institutionalized get wrong
  ...
  To kill the buddha, or sompetimes just the master, is a way to remind
  the monk that they have to find the truth in themsleves and never to
  take any master talk for granted.

  In our (definition-wise) lower mentality it is not likely that we can
  'kill' the smarter. So the condition involves the un-possibility,
  even
  if we are capable to recognise them
   - what we are not likely to be.

  Agreed. It was just a parabola for driving attention against any use
  of
  authoritative argument in the field of fundamentals.
  Ah! But the lobian machine too can be shown allergic to such argument.
  It's a universal dissident. Unforunately, humans, like dog are still
  attracted to the practical philosophy according to which the boss is
  right (especially when wrong!)

  Bruno

  PS Perhaps this week I will got the time to send the next post in the
  observer-moment = Sigma_1 sentence.

  Well, I'm pleased to hear the lobian machine is a 'universal
  dissident'.  I wouldn't want to imply that 'the boss is right'.  All I
  was implying was that (in the case of super-intelligence) the boss
  would be *stronger*.  Whether the boss is right or not, we little guys
  wouldn't have much power so our negotiating power would be seriously
  limited initally.  The best that could be hoped for from such a
  hypothetical 'social contract' in the beginning is that the SI doesn't
  hurt us.

 OK.

 You know I am confident that real SI would not hurt you, except by
 accident. The problem is that we cannot distinguished real SI from
 real SI, er I mean real super-intelligent (Sintel) from real
 super-idiot (Sidiot).

 I guess that is why democracy, when it is normally functioning,  is the
 best of the system, allowing to change your mind about the people we
 are delegating power to.(by democracy I mean mainly here:
 education + repeated  well organized election).

 Note that normally real SIntell will never present themselves as
 SIntell, only real Sidiot would do that. So, although,  there does
 not exist a way to test Super intelligence , there are some cases where
 we can  be almost sure to be in front of Super-stupidity ...

 Good week-end Marc, and All,(please revise the notion of bijection.
 Are everybody convinced that N is in bijection with N X N, and with N X
 N X N X N X... ?

 David, do you mind if I send next week your solution (which were
 correct) of the exercises I gave online once to the list?   I am sure
 it could help some other. All that  is needed to get Church's thesis
 eventually right. Recall that Church thesis is one half of COMP.

 Bruno

 http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



Re: Request to form 'Social Contract' with SAI

2007-10-19 Thread Bruno Marchal


Le 17-oct.-07, à 08:16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :




 On Oct 16, 11:37 pm, Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


  If it is ''a'-rtificial' I question the 'natural one' (following
 Bruno's fear of the (natural?) 'super stupidity'.) Yet I don't think
 Marc wants to let himself denature into an artifact.

 Not necessarily, but look at Saibal's recent answer!
 This raises a question for Mark. What if the future SAI, SI
 should we say, are computationalist? Marc, is it ok if those SI
 reincarnate you digitally? Could they decide without your consent
 (without being super-stupid?).

 Your points are well taken Bruno.  We should be highly suspicious of
 any 'authority' that thinks to act without our consent.

 As for cryonics, Saibal , I think it's a good option.  If necessary,
 I'm quite prepared to put myself in the freezer - I have no intention
 of getting any older than a biological age of 65 - if I live that long
 I might be the first guy in the world to volunteer for a 'live
 freeze' (I would probably have to move to a country where there are
 laws allowing for assisted suicide though!)




 Again, not necessarily. Buddhism, unlike Christianity, has always been
 very aware that religious truth, once institutionalized get wrong
 ...
 To kill the buddha, or sompetimes just the master, is a way to remind
 the monk that they have to find the truth in themsleves and never to
 take any master talk for granted.

 In our (definition-wise) lower mentality it is not likely that we can
 'kill' the smarter. So the condition involves the un-possibility, 
 even
 if we are capable to recognise them
  - what we are not likely to be.

 Agreed. It was just a parabola for driving attention against any use 
 of
 authoritative argument in the field of fundamentals.
 Ah! But the lobian machine too can be shown allergic to such argument.
 It's a universal dissident. Unforunately, humans, like dog are still
 attracted to the practical philosophy according to which the boss is
 right (especially when wrong!)

 Bruno

 PS Perhaps this week I will got the time to send the next post in the
 observer-moment = Sigma_1 sentence.


 Well, I'm pleased to hear the lobian machine is a 'universal
 dissident'.  I wouldn't want to imply that 'the boss is right'.  All I
 was implying was that (in the case of super-intelligence) the boss
 would be *stronger*.  Whether the boss is right or not, we little guys
 wouldn't have much power so our negotiating power would be seriously
 limited initally.  The best that could be hoped for from such a
 hypothetical 'social contract' in the beginning is that the SI doesn't
 hurt us.



OK.


You know I am confident that real SI would not hurt you, except by 
accident. The problem is that we cannot distinguished real SI from 
real SI, er I mean real super-intelligent (Sintel) from real 
super-idiot (Sidiot).

I guess that is why democracy, when it is normally functioning,  is the 
best of the system, allowing to change your mind about the people we 
are delegating power to.(by democracy I mean mainly here:  
education + repeated  well organized election).

Note that normally real SIntell will never present themselves as 
SIntell, only real Sidiot would do that. So, although,  there does 
not exist a way to test Super intelligence , there are some cases where 
we can  be almost sure to be in front of Super-stupidity ...

Good week-end Marc, and All,(please revise the notion of bijection. 
Are everybody convinced that N is in bijection with N X N, and with N X 
N X N X N X... ?

David, do you mind if I send next week your solution (which were 
correct) of the exercises I gave online once to the list?   I am sure 
it could help some other. All that  is needed to get Church's thesis 
eventually right. Recall that Church thesis is one half of COMP.

Bruno




http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



Re: Request to form 'Social Contract' with SAI

2007-10-17 Thread marc . geddes



On Oct 16, 11:37 pm, Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


   If it is ''a'-rtificial' I question the 'natural one' (following
  Bruno's fear of the (natural?) 'super stupidity'.) Yet I don't think
  Marc wants to let himself denature into an artifact.

 Not necessarily, but look at Saibal's recent answer!
 This raises a question for Mark. What if the future SAI, SI
 should we say, are computationalist? Marc, is it ok if those SI
 reincarnate you digitally? Could they decide without your consent
 (without being super-stupid?).

Your points are well taken Bruno.  We should be highly suspicious of
any 'authority' that thinks to act without our consent.

As for cryonics, Saibal , I think it's a good option.  If necessary,
I'm quite prepared to put myself in the freezer - I have no intention
of getting any older than a biological age of 65 - if I live that long
I might be the first guy in the world to volunteer for a 'live
freeze' (I would probably have to move to a country where there are
laws allowing for assisted suicide though!)




 Again, not necessarily. Buddhism, unlike Christianity, has always been
 very aware that religious truth, once institutionalized get wrong
 ...
 To kill the buddha, or sompetimes just the master, is a way to remind
 the monk that they have to find the truth in themsleves and never to
 take any master talk for granted.

  In our (definition-wise) lower mentality it is not likely that we can
  'kill' the smarter. So the condition involves the un-possibility, even
  if we are capable to recognise them
   - what we are not likely to be.

 Agreed. It was just a parabola for driving attention against any use of
 authoritative argument in the field of fundamentals.
 Ah! But the lobian machine too can be shown allergic to such argument.
 It's a universal dissident. Unforunately, humans, like dog are still
 attracted to the practical philosophy according to which the boss is
 right (especially when wrong!)

 Bruno

 PS Perhaps this week I will got the time to send the next post in the
 observer-moment = Sigma_1 sentence.


Well, I'm pleased to hear the lobian machine is a 'universal
dissident'.  I wouldn't want to imply that 'the boss is right'.  All I
was implying was that (in the case of super-intelligence) the boss
would be *stronger*.  Whether the boss is right or not, we little guys
wouldn't have much power so our negotiating power would be seriously
limited initally.  The best that could be hoped for from such a
hypothetical 'social contract' in the beginning is that the SI doesn't
hurt us.



--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



Re: Request to form 'Social Contract' with SAI

2007-10-16 Thread Bruno Marchal

Le 15-oct.-07, à 20:51, John Mikes a écrit :

 Marc: excellent.
 Even Statis responded - although I cannot understand why he wrote 
 they and not us?
 My problem is the A pertinent to SAI: s  u  p  e  r  i  n  t  e  l  
 l  i  g  e  n  c  e  dores not contain an A. 


Well seen!




  If it is ''a'-rtificial' I question the 'natural one' (following 
 Bruno's fear of the (natural?) 'super stupidity'.) Yet I don't think 
 Marc wants to let himself denature into an artifact.


Not necessarily, but look at Saibal's recent answer!
This raises a question for Mark. What if the future SAI, SI 
should we say, are computationalist? Marc, is it ok if those SI 
reincarnate you digitally? Could they decide without your consent 
(without being super-stupid?).




 So: what is the A standing for?

 I have a solution to the ID of superintelligence, I got it in a 
 malicious discussion group of peers when I denigrated the 'exceedingly 
 wealthy' as getting inevitably demoralised, I was asked whom I 
 consider 'exceedingly wealthy'? One chap quipped: whoever is wealthier 
 then himself. So I can find lots of 'superintelligents' in these 
 terms. it is not a contractual belonging-to it is a quality. 
 Unidefinable. But: smarter than me.

 It is some 'koanic' wisdom of the Budhist to kill all 
 superintelligent on the road. It requires considerable 'intelligence' 
 (whatever that may be) to recognise the more-'so' on the road.


Again, not necessarily. Buddhism, unlike Christianity, has always been 
very aware that religious truth, once institutionalized get wrong 
...
To kill the buddha, or sompetimes just the master, is a way to remind 
the monk that they have to find the truth in themsleves and never to 
take any master talk for granted.



 In our (definition-wise) lower mentality it is not likely that we can 
 'kill' the smarter. So the condition involves the un-possibility, even 
 if we are capable to recognise them
  - what we are not likely to be.


Agreed. It was just a parabola for driving attention against any use of 
authoritative argument in the field of fundamentals.
Ah! But the lobian machine too can be shown allergic to such argument. 
It's a universal dissident. Unforunately, humans, like dog are still 
attracted to the practical philosophy according to which the boss is 
right (especially when wrong!)


Bruno

PS Perhaps this week I will got the time to send the next post in the 
observer-moment = Sigma_1 sentence.





 On 10/15/07, Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Le 15-oct.-07, à 07:17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :

 
 
 
  On Oct 14, 3:39 am, Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED]  wrote:
 
 
  Take care, trust yourself and kill all the SAI on the road, to
  paraphrase a well known Buddhist idea. Either you are sufficiently
  clever to understand the SAI arguments, showing you are already an 
 SAI
  yourself, and your message is without purpose, or you are not, in
  which
  case, to keep soundness (by lobianity), you better be skeptical, 
 (and
  not to abide so quick imo).
  
  Unless you want to loose your universality, and be a slave, a tool.
 
  Bruno
 
  http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
 
  Heh.  Bruno, I continue to analyse my current (human) condition to 
 try
  to find a way out of this mess (I'm not a happy bloke).  Still
  considering many possibilities.  Given the possibility that super-
  intelligences do already (or will in the future) exist,  there's a
  chance that a non-interference policy is being/will be pursued, but
  that there's a way to get their attention - it could be a simple
  matter of indicating that you are aware of the possibility and
  requesting to 'sign' a 'social contract'.  Get in early now! ;)


 The price of the existence of intelligence, is the existence of
 stupidity. I am afraid that the price of super-intelligence is
 super-stupidity, and if you are not super-intelligent yourself, then
 you cannot be sure of making the difference, and you are taking the
 risk of alerting the super-idiots of the universe ...
 So be careful when writing the social contract. What do *you* intend
 to put in the contract?

 Bruno





 http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
  

http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



Re: Request to form 'Social Contract' with SAI

2007-10-16 Thread Bruno Marchal


Le 16-oct.-07, à 12:37, I said, in a post to John Mikes,






 Agreed. It was just a parabola for driving attention against any use 
 of authoritative argument in the field of fundamentals.
 Ah! But the lobian machine too can be shown allergic to such argument. 
 It's a universal dissident. Unforunately, humans, like dog are still 
 attracted to the practical philosophy according to which the boss is 
 right (especially when wrong!)


Please remind I talk as a platonist, having the long run in mind. 
Obviously, (sadly I think), the boss is right theory has some 
selective, darwinian, advantage in the short run. The poor self-moving 
carnivore, before asking itself to be or not to be goes through some 
long to eat or to be eated, forcing it to take quick decisions in 
presence of partial information, and here the boss can help, a lot, 
indeed. A little like in an army where orders are usual and natural, 
or in conventional or typed programming with its well-behaved 
subroutines. It is not yet completely clear (arithmetical) why and if 
it has to be so locally everywhere, for the (sound) lobian machine or 
lobian entity (cf S4Grz). But the fundamentals have to be coherent with 
the long run, and so, in the limit at least, the lobian entity has to 
demolish, indeed, all authoritative arguments. An hard (transfinite) 
task.



Marc, I am just telling you what the self-referentially platonist 
machine suggest: invoking some entity (being it machine, human, god, or 
whatever) as smarter is akin to give a name to something unameable. You 
can reason about it, but you cannot identify them with anything.


All,
Recall just PA is a less rich lobian machine that ZF, also a lobian 
machine. Less rich means less rich the in size of their set of 
arithmetical sentences they can prove, I mean ZF proves more 
arithmetical sentences than PA).
Then, it is like if PA , after having proved correctly that ZF can 
prove the consistency of PA; concludes in its own consistency.

True: ZF proves the consistency of PA.
True: PA can proves that! i.e: PA can prove that ZF proves the 
consistency of PA.(even RA can prove that for those who reminds the 
weak RA)
True: PA cannot deduce from that that PA is consistent.
True: PA cannot prove its own consistency (consistency of PA)
true: ZF cannot prove its own consistency . Hmmm unless ZF is 
inconsistent.
I am 100% confident in the consistency (and even soundness) of PA.
I am 99,9998 % confident in the consistency of ZF (and even less in 
absence of coffee I'm afraid)



Bruno






 PS Perhaps this week I will got the time to send the next post in the 
 observer-moment = Sigma_1 sentence.

http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



Re: Request to form 'Social Contract' with SAI

2007-10-16 Thread John Mikes
Saibal:
good idea, provided that our concept of 'freezing' works on ALL aspects
beyond the
assumed 'physical world' contraption. We have the deficiency of thinking in
our material system concepts - space-time-physical motion-conventional
'science' limitations, like freezing etc. and consider them as all.
Do freezable neuron-connections identify e.g. the validity of a legal
opinion?
(to keep my peace here, I did not include or numbers in my question)

John M

On 10/15/07, Saibal Mitra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


 The best thing you could do is to freeze your brain. I think that will
 preserve the connections between the neurons, although the cells will be
 destroyed.

 This will make it easier for a future civilization to regenerate you
 digitally


 - Original Message -
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 To: Everything List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 07:17 AM
 Subject: Re: Request to form 'Social Contract' with SAI


 
 
 
  On Oct 14, 3:39 am, Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  
   Take care, trust yourself and kill all the SAI on the road, to
   paraphrase a well known Buddhist idea. Either you are sufficiently
   clever to understand the SAI arguments, showing you are already an SAI
   yourself, and your message is without purpose, or you are not, in
 which
   case, to keep soundness (by lobianity), you better be skeptical, (and
   not to abide so quick imo).
  
   Unless you want to loose your universality, and be a slave, a tool.
  
   Bruno
  
   http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
 
  Heh.  Bruno, I continue to analyse my current (human) condition to try
  to find a way out of this mess (I'm not a happy bloke).  Still
  considering many possibilities.  Given the possibility that super-
  intelligences do already (or will in the future) exist,  there's a
  chance that a non-interference policy is being/will be pursued, but
  that there's a way to get their attention - it could be a simple
  matter of indicating that you are aware of the possibility and
  requesting to 'sign' a 'social contract'.  Get in early now! ;)
 
 
  


 


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



Re: Request to form 'Social Contract' with SAI

2007-10-15 Thread Stathis Papaioannou

On 15/10/2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Heh.  Bruno, I continue to analyse my current (human) condition to try
 to find a way out of this mess (I'm not a happy bloke).  Still
 considering many possibilities.  Given the possibility that super-
 intelligences do already (or will in the future) exist,  there's a
 chance that a non-interference policy is being/will be pursued, but
 that there's a way to get their attention - it could be a simple
 matter of indicating that you are aware of the possibility and
 requesting to 'sign' a 'social contract'.  Get in early now! ;)

Although if they're so far beyond us that we can't detect them I think
we have to assume that their motives and psychology are completely
unknown: there is no reason to favour the theory that they would
reveal themselves to someone acknowledging their existence rather than
that they would ignore him or wipe him out prematurely. The same
criticism applies to Robin Hanson's paper on how we should behave if
we're in a simulation:
http://www.transhumanist.com/volume7/simulation.html





-- 
Stathis Papaioannou

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



Re: Request to form 'Social Contract' with SAI

2007-10-15 Thread Bruno Marchal


Le 15-oct.-07, à 07:17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :




 On Oct 14, 3:39 am, Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


 Take care, trust yourself and kill all the SAI on the road, to
 paraphrase a well known Buddhist idea. Either you are sufficiently
 clever to understand the SAI arguments, showing you are already an SAI
 yourself, and your message is without purpose, or you are not, in 
 which
 case, to keep soundness (by lobianity), you better be skeptical, (and
 not to abide so quick imo).

 Unless you want to loose your universality, and be a slave, a tool.

 Bruno

 http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/

 Heh.  Bruno, I continue to analyse my current (human) condition to try
 to find a way out of this mess (I'm not a happy bloke).  Still
 considering many possibilities.  Given the possibility that super-
 intelligences do already (or will in the future) exist,  there's a
 chance that a non-interference policy is being/will be pursued, but
 that there's a way to get their attention - it could be a simple
 matter of indicating that you are aware of the possibility and
 requesting to 'sign' a 'social contract'.  Get in early now! ;)


The price of the existence of intelligence, is the existence of 
stupidity. I am afraid that the price of super-intelligence is 
super-stupidity, and if you are not super-intelligent yourself, then 
you cannot be sure of making the difference, and you are taking the 
risk of alerting the super-idiots of the universe ...
So be careful when writing the social contract. What do *you* intend 
to put in the contract?

Bruno





http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



Re: Request to form 'Social Contract' with SAI

2007-10-15 Thread John Mikes
Marc: excellent.
Even Statis responded - although I cannot understand why he wrote they and
not us?
My problem is the A pertinent to SAI: s  u  p  e  r  i  n  t  e  l  l  i
g  e  n  c  e  dores not contain an A.  If it is ''a'-rtificial' I
question the 'natural one' (following Bruno's fear of the (natural?) 'super
stupidity'.) Yet I don't think Marc wants to let himself denature into an
artifact. So: what is the A standing for?

I have a solution to the ID of superintelligence, I got it in a malicious
discussion group of peers when I denigrated the 'exceedingly wealthy' as
getting inevitably demoralised, I was asked whom I consider 'exceedingly
wealthy'? One chap quipped: whoever is wealthier then himself. So I can find
lots of 'superintelligents' in these terms. it is not a contractual
belonging-to it is a quality. Unidefinable. But: smarter than me.

It is some 'koanic' wisdom of the Budhist to kill all superintelligent on
the road. It requires considerable 'intelligence' (whatever that may be) to
recognise the more-'so' on the road.
In our (definition-wise) lower mentality it is not likely that we can 'kill'
the smarter. So the condition involves the un-possibility, even if we are
capable to recognise them
 - what we are not likely to be.

On 10/15/07, Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:



 Le 15-oct.-07, à 07:17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :

 
 
 
  On Oct 14, 3:39 am, Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
 
  Take care, trust yourself and kill all the SAI on the road, to
  paraphrase a well known Buddhist idea. Either you are sufficiently
  clever to understand the SAI arguments, showing you are already an SAI
  yourself, and your message is without purpose, or you are not, in
  which
  case, to keep soundness (by lobianity), you better be skeptical, (and
  not to abide so quick imo).
 
  Unless you want to loose your universality, and be a slave, a tool.
 
  Bruno
 
  http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
 
  Heh.  Bruno, I continue to analyse my current (human) condition to try
  to find a way out of this mess (I'm not a happy bloke).  Still
  considering many possibilities.  Given the possibility that super-
  intelligences do already (or will in the future) exist,  there's a
  chance that a non-interference policy is being/will be pursued, but
  that there's a way to get their attention - it could be a simple
  matter of indicating that you are aware of the possibility and
  requesting to 'sign' a 'social contract'.  Get in early now! ;)


 The price of the existence of intelligence, is the existence of
 stupidity. I am afraid that the price of super-intelligence is
 super-stupidity, and if you are not super-intelligent yourself, then
 you cannot be sure of making the difference, and you are taking the
 risk of alerting the super-idiots of the universe ...
 So be careful when writing the social contract. What do *you* intend
 to put in the contract?

 Bruno





 http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/

 


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



Re: Request to form 'Social Contract' with SAI

2007-10-15 Thread Saibal Mitra

The best thing you could do is to freeze your brain. I think that will
preserve the connections between the neurons, although the cells will be
destroyed.

This will make it easier for a future civilization to regenerate you
digitally


- Original Message - 
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Everything List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 07:17 AM
Subject: Re: Request to form 'Social Contract' with SAI





 On Oct 14, 3:39 am, Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 
  Take care, trust yourself and kill all the SAI on the road, to
  paraphrase a well known Buddhist idea. Either you are sufficiently
  clever to understand the SAI arguments, showing you are already an SAI
  yourself, and your message is without purpose, or you are not, in which
  case, to keep soundness (by lobianity), you better be skeptical, (and
  not to abide so quick imo).
 
  Unless you want to loose your universality, and be a slave, a tool.
 
  Bruno
 
  http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/

 Heh.  Bruno, I continue to analyse my current (human) condition to try
 to find a way out of this mess (I'm not a happy bloke).  Still
 considering many possibilities.  Given the possibility that super-
 intelligences do already (or will in the future) exist,  there's a
 chance that a non-interference policy is being/will be pursued, but
 that there's a way to get their attention - it could be a simple
 matter of indicating that you are aware of the possibility and
 requesting to 'sign' a 'social contract'.  Get in early now! ;)


 


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



Re: Request to form 'Social Contract' with SAI

2007-10-14 Thread Jason Resch
On 10/13/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


 12th October, 2007

 Marc Geddes
 Auckland
 New Zealand

 ---

 This is Marc Geddes ,

 I am publically requesting to form a social contract with SAI (Super
 Intelligence).I am aware of the existence of SAI and SAI-space and
 am of sound mind and my own volition requesting  to be removed from
 human space and uplifted to SAI space at the earliest possible
 opportunately.  I agree to abide by all rules and boundaries set by
 SAI as per my responsibilities under the social contract.

 Thank you.


How do you know you're not already part of a super intelligence which is
exploring the potentialities of consciousness by implementing your mind via
the appropriate computations, with the goal to later merge your memories
with its mind?  If all possible universes exist then an infinite number of
you are instantied by such super intelligences, and after those copies of
you experience death they will experience the supermind.

Jason

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



Re: Request to form 'Social Contract' with SAI

2007-10-14 Thread marc . geddes



On Oct 14, 3:39 am, Bruno Marchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


 Take care, trust yourself and kill all the SAI on the road, to
 paraphrase a well known Buddhist idea. Either you are sufficiently
 clever to understand the SAI arguments, showing you are already an SAI
 yourself, and your message is without purpose, or you are not, in which
 case, to keep soundness (by lobianity), you better be skeptical, (and
 not to abide so quick imo).

 Unless you want to loose your universality, and be a slave, a tool.

 Bruno

 http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/

Heh.  Bruno, I continue to analyse my current (human) condition to try
to find a way out of this mess (I'm not a happy bloke).  Still
considering many possibilities.  Given the possibility that super-
intelligences do already (or will in the future) exist,  there's a
chance that a non-interference policy is being/will be pursued, but
that there's a way to get their attention - it could be a simple
matter of indicating that you are aware of the possibility and
requesting to 'sign' a 'social contract'.  Get in early now! ;)


--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---



Re: Request to form 'Social Contract' with SAI

2007-10-13 Thread Bruno Marchal


Le 13-oct.-07, à 07:11, [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :




 12th October, 2007

 Marc Geddes
 Auckland
 New Zealand

 ---

 This is Marc Geddes ,

 I am publically requesting to form a social contract with SAI (Super
 Intelligence).I am aware of the existence of SAI and SAI-space and
 am of sound mind



Do *you* know that?




  and my own volition requesting  to be removed from
 human space


(I can understand sometimes)




 and uplifted to SAI space at the earliest possible
 opportunately.  I agree to abide by all rules and boundaries set by
 SAI


Do *you* know them? Do you understand them?




 as per my responsibilities under the social contract.

 Thank you.


Take care, trust yourself and kill all the SAI on the road, to 
paraphrase a well known Buddhist idea. Either you are sufficiently 
clever to understand the SAI arguments, showing you are already an SAI 
yourself, and your message is without purpose, or you are not, in which 
case, to keep soundness (by lobianity), you better be skeptical, (and 
not to abide so quick imo).

Unless you want to loose your universality, and be a slave, a tool.

Bruno



http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Everything List group.
To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---