[extropy-chat] Self replicating computer programs ?

[Eugen Leitl]

On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 09:35:52AM +1100, Brett Paatsch wrote:
> Eugen Leitl wrote:
> 
> [Brett: Sorry I'm a bit short of time now to go over all I'd 
> like to in this topic and other interest topics on the list but
> here are some thoughts]
> 
> > [Brett]
> > > > I think I'd rather test myself against someone else's
> > > > "aggressive" weapon design then put my mind to the
> > > > engineering problem of making and discussing a better
> > > > weapon myself. - Until I can find a way of doing a
> > > > logical end-run around the whole grey-goo
> 
> > You're making a logical mistake. Grey goo is not about
> > logic, it's about security and technology/engineering.
> > This is not something you talk about, this is something
> > you need to address in simulators, tiger groups, and in field
> > tests. In very practical hands-on setting, in other words.
> > A whitehat ignorant of blackhats isn't.
> 
> Perhaps logical is the wrong word. But at present MNT
> assemblers have at least one characteristic in common with
> perpetual motion machines and that is that to date no working
> models have been produced from any specification. Whether
> MNT designs differ from perpetual motion machines designs
> in having the characteristic of build-ability about them still seems
> to be a nub of debate for most folk that talk about nanotech
> away from the transhumanist and foresight subcultures.
> 
> Probably very few folk (generally not just on this list) would
> have actually read Drexler's Nanosystems. I haven't read it cover
> to cover either btw. I did read appendix A however in which 
> Drexler talks about Methodological Issues in Theoretical Applied
> Science (theoretical applied science being a term that he coined
> himself and imo its unfortunately laboured terminology - I'd have
> preferred applied theoretical science myself).
> 
> What I meant by logical and perhaps it is the wrong word is
> that even in design the rules of contingency apply -or should if
> one doesn't want to waste ones time - pace Euler.  
> 
> All designs for nanotechnological devices that violate the know
> laws of physics are not going to satisfy the design limit of 
> contingency. That is pretty obvious. 
> 
> What I was messing about with is that there are possibly other
> types of design limitations that take into account the set of all
> possible human design motivations. I think it is *pretty* safe
> to assume for instance that no-one wants to build a grey goo
> replicator (even as a weapon) that they can't control to the 
> extent of ensuring that it does not turn them into grey goo. They
> probably also don't want to turn their family and friends into 
> grey goo or the environments in which they will need to live.
> (Already -within the analysis of what would-be designers of
> nano-weapons would want to build we are cutting down the
> design space). My notion of a logical end-run around the whole
> problem of grey-goo was that it just *might* be possible 
> (assuming rational weapons designers - a big assumption but
> itself a manageable one) to so much cut down the design
> space of what would-be rational designers would want to 
> build that when one added in the engineering constraints
> of what they could build there *might* be no space left.
> 
> *If* that was the case we would have achieved something very
> valuable. We would have done what I'd term end-run 
> logical analysis around the problem and shown that it was not
> a real problem in the real world at all. The reason it would be
> useful to do that *if* that was the result and perhaps anyway
> is that the finding would be useful *politically* to head off 
> concerns raised by folk that may otherwise get into serious
> fear-mongering aimed at heading off the development of 
> MNT altogether. Folk such as the writers of The New Atlantas
> that Greg Burch posted to the list recently.
> 
> Heres the link again 
> http://www.thenewatlantis.com/archive/2/keiper.htm
> 
> I was particularly interested in the above article that
> referenced Robert Freitas views on the grey goo problem.
> 
> These folk at New Atlantas are becoming knowledgeable
> enough to make some good pre-emptive political strikes 
> against the emergence of MNT that may slow down its 
> delivery times, imo. 
> 
> There is a period before any new technology is produced but
> when it is known to be possible to some that is very difficult
> to find basic development funding for. Because funding to do 
> basic science generally comes from governments. VC capital
> is typically less patient and there are good reasons for that, 
> winning the hearts and minds of voters in the propaganda
> wars is very important to the ultimate roll out times. 

-- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144 http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20031115/3d85d185/attachment.bin>