On 10/26/07, Stefan Pernar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 10/26/07, Benjamin Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> X0 = me >> Y0 = what X0 thinks is good for the world >> X1 = what X0 wants to be >> Y1 = what X1 would think is good for the world >> X2 = what X1 would want to be >> Y2 = what X2 would think is good for the world. > > Hmm - I may be treading on thin ice here but wouldn't X0 have to be good to > begin with for X2 to be good? I still believe that the output CEV is aiming > to deliver is required as initial input in order to succeed.
No. For me to think that "what I would want to be" is 'good', I do not have to think that I am 'good' right now. An AI implementing CEV doesn't question, is the thing that humans express that they ultimately want, 'good' or not. If it is what the humans really want, then it is done. No thinking about whether it is really 'good' (except the thinking done by the humans answering the questions, and the possible simulations/modifications/whatever of those humans -- and they indeed think that it *is* 'good'). -- Aleksei Riikonen - http://www.iki.fi/aleksei ----- 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/?member_id=4007604&id_secret=57902500-ec1204
