[extropy-chat] intelligent design homework

[Samantha Atkins]

On Aug 7, 2005, at 3:44 PM, Jeff Medina wrote:

> On 8/7/05, Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:
>
>> The (tonuge in cheek) notion was that a sufficiently powerful
>> intelligence would effectively create a highly articulated sim simply
>> in the act of considering its own past or alternate history.
>>
>
> This isn't as tongue-in-cheek as you might think. I have a paper draft
> on the ethics of superintelligent thought that considers this very
> problem. The being needn't consider its own past or alternate history
> -- any 'daydreaming' could suffice. It is mathematically
> demonstratable that a sufficiently intelligent being could think other
> conscious beings into existence in ver own mind; which might be quite
> unfortunate for the dreamt-up person, should the thinker/creator
> decide to ponder something or someone else instead.

 From the context of the creation it is not "unfortunate" as the  
created beings have nothing to compare to.  However much time the  
creation was run is simply all there is.  The very concept of time  
outside the creation is unknowable and paradoxical from within it  
unless there is leakage from surrounding context.

At what point of intelligence or whatever does a created being, for  
instance a NPC, become a being whose disposition or world disposition  
raises moral questions?   Should all sufficiently advanced created  
beings be given some possibility of transcendence of their original  
context, for instance?

- samantha