Joel,
I apologize, but I'm not sure I understand how you're using the term 'Sol'
here, but I think I see where you are going with this, so I'm going to take
a run at this anyway.
Key words in your question are 'decide' and 'take apart.' The knowledge
creation process is distinct from the decision process and action or
performance.
It is possible to advance knowledge beyond known limits and never 'decide to
do' anything. Advancing that knowledge creates a potential to do though,
which does need to be managed. Related to this, I separate 'futuring' into
three categories:
1) Social advance - The center is knowledge creation
2) Social Context - The center is the balance of interests
3) Industry - The center is supply and demand
In this definition, social advance = cumulative created knowledge that has
been accepted by society. So then the knowledge creation process, and
really knowledge itself, gives a society options to decide upon, and to do
things with. The more knowledge a society has, the more that society can
potentially decide to do with it. But 'deciding and doing' are not inherent
to knowledge creation....these are very much distinct in their operation.
For example, it would be possible to increase our nanotechnology knowledge
beyond comprehensible limits and still not decide as a society to do
anything with that knowledge. Or we could decide to base our entire
economic system on a 'molecular economy,' as we are basically starting to do
now. The implication here is that we have in knowledge the power to do.
Power to make material multiplied times lighter and stronger than steel, or
power to make nanobombs that can level a city from your shirt pocket.
Neither is executed without an intention and decision to do.
Social context, is how we deal with these options. How society, for
example, copes with change and volatility associated with knowledge advance.
It is in this social context that decisions are made. Decisions require
consciousness and intention. The barrier is teaching the machine to have
intention. A machine can anticipate intention, but I don't see a machine
originating it, because this is a function of consciousness, which I see as
residing outside of logic and knowledge.
Industry is the science of making things. It is application or 'doing' in
society. Granted, we do things within the social context as well (e.g.
philanthropy or war), but by in large, industry is the actionable arm of
society. This is likely where a machine would 'do' something, if it had
intention and could decide.
Said all this to say that artificial knowledge creation can be an automated
expanding of knowledge to storage limits independent of any decisions,
social context and its application, or industrial application. By nature of
how the knowledge creation process really works, this is exactly how I think
it will look...a self-expanding resource and not an intentional
decision-making machine.
But I can't deny that, at some juncture, we may find ourselves dealing with
an conscious or aware machine that can choose and can then act through
cyber-benevolence, cyber-terrorism, robotics, etc. But as I understand the
knowledge creation process, this is more science fiction than reality. I
see the paradigm more naturally evolving as an automated 'resource' that
expands to its storage limits and that is, and will always be, incapable of
intentionality or decision-making (unless these are loaded into it by a
human).
The tricky thing here is that it is possible to load intention or decision
criteria into a machine, such that it makes judgements based on the
intention/decision it is given...an extension of the expert system type of
thing. "Machine, when you reach these GPS coordinates, nanobomb, blow up."
The intention and decision in this scenario ultimately extends out from a
human being and is not 'originated' by the machine. Based on my current
understanding of the knowledge creation process, which again is very cold,
logical, and predictable...the the most likely scenario will be that
intention and decisions always ultimately will originate from the human
creator (though sometimes this 'origin' will be buried under pre-loaded
decision trees).
I definitely can't deny that machine awareness is possible, but I think it's
more prudent at this juncture in human history to manage the social context
created by human beings. It's my opinion, that human beings themselves will
intend or decide their own fate, and that as we learn more and more about
the knowledge creation process, the machine/technology is going to be proven
to be only a tool that magnifies the potential for human intentionality,
decision, and for action...be it benevolent or destructive action....not an
intentional, decision-making entity. When we develop true AKC, we'll start
to understand how deep, and spiritual, the mystery of human intention,
decision-making, awareness, and consciousness really is. And given the
powerful machine/technology tools we will hold in our hands, it will be this
facet of humanity that we need to mature. In my opinion, this is what we
are all going to face at singularity...our own humanity and not the machine.
Kind Regards,
Bruce LaDuke
Managing Director
Instant Innovation, LLC
Indianapolis, IN
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.hyperadvance.com
----Original Message Follows----
From: "Joel Pitt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "Bruce LaDuke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [singularity] Is Friendly AI Bunk?
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 13:50:05 +1200
On 9/11/06, Bruce LaDuke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Emotion then, really doesn't enter into this equation. Emotion is a part
of
replicating the human paradigm, but does not have to be at all involved in
terms of automating or mechanizing knowledge advance. Knowledge creation
appears to be serendipitous, but in reality it is a cold, hard, logical
process with no feelings in it. It operates by converting questions, which
are a perceived lack of knowledge structure, into knowledge, which is the
logical structure of symbols. This is the process behind all the
'creativity' terms and methods across all disciplines and industries. It
is
very predictable and could theoretically be mechanized.
Interesting take on AI/AKC.
I think that even being primarily focussed on the creation of
knowledge still needs directional goals and consideration of
"Friendliness" topics. What if your AKC engine decides it needs to
irreversably take apart Sol in order to gain knowledge on the how
stars work?
--
-Joel
"Wish not to seem, but to be, the best."
-- Aeschylus
-------
AGIRI.org hosts two discussion lists: http://www.agiri.org/email
[singularity] = more general, [agi] = more technical
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
