[extropy-chat] Bluff and the Darwin award.

[Keith Henson]

At 01:48 PM 5/16/2006 -0700, you wrote:
>----- Original Message ----
>From: Keith Henson <hkhenson at rogers.com>
>To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 3:10:31 PM
>Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Bluff and the Darwin award.
>
>
> > In really broad brush now is the time to think about the relations we 
> would
> > like the AI "gods" and human uploads to have with whatever is left of the
> > physical world and the people in it.
>
>Isn't it likely that the AIs and others will have no more interest in 
>messing with humanity than we have of messing with particularly harmless 
>strains of bacteria?

Wouldn't you prefer that human scale and below intelligences be treated 
with respect rather than being casually wiped out by "cleaning products"?

>Technology, in effect, "creates" resources where none existed before, by 
>changing what is useful and how it's desirable to use it, as well as by 
>exponentially increasing efficiency. The technologies centering around oil 
>"created" a substitute for wood, coal, stone, and steel out of "nothing" 
>(something which was regarded as an unfortunate blight upon any land which 
>had it). We have "created" trillions of new barrels of oil in the last few 
>decades, by improving our location and extraction techniques...therefore 
>it seems likely that AI could advance so quickly, technologically, as to 
>not really see us as a threat to what THEY consider precious resources, 
>much as you and I aren't worried about people building log cabins in Montana.
>
> > Incidentally, the consequences of the singularity not being "soon" are
> > rather dire, the death of a large part of the world's population in wars
> > and other events driven by too many people and too few resources.
>
>This has been the fear since the days of Thomas Maltus, and I've never 
>seen any evidence that it's more than the fallacy of static analysis.
>
>In reality, resources keep expanding /faster/ than humanity, thanks to 
>technology, and despite all the warfare the world keeps becoming more 
>populated (yet not truly overpopulated, aside from inefficient resource 
>distribution thanks to socialism) and prosperous, not falling into the 
>disaster that Mathusians predicted by 1800, then by 1850, then by 1900, et 
>cetera.
The technology of or leading up to the singularity *is* what will save our 
collective bacon--if anything does.

Keith Henson