[ExI] Nine Misunderstandings About AI
Damien Broderick
thespike at satx.rr.com
Tue Apr 8 19:55:17 UTC 2008
At 03:01 PM 4/8/2008 -0400, Richard wrote:
>http://susaro.com/
I don't know what you're saying in this par:
<8. It is often assumed that there will be large numbers of robots,
but they will all be controlled by different governments or
corporations, and used as instruments of power. The main argument
against this idea is that it would require an extremely unlikely
combination of circumstances for this kind of situation to become
established. The first artificial intelligence would have to be both
smart and designed to be aggressive, but this combination would be
almost impossible to pull off, even for a military organization. The
long version of the argument against this idea is too long to
summarize in one paragraph, but the bottom line is that even though
this seems like a reasonable and plausible possibility for the
future, it turns out to be deeply implausible when examined carefully. >
Perhaps you mean the idea that ONLY large entities, governmental and
corporate, would have AIs/bots, as is the case these days with
aircraft carriers and nuclear power stations. All others would be
illegal. If so, what has this to do with the first AIs being
*aggressive*? Designed for death-dealing?
Or are you arguing against a claim (perhaps akin to Asimov's
positronic brains with structured-in Laws) that there'll be many
robots but all necessarily of the same architecture--except now it
would be aggressive?
Damien Broderick
More information about the extropy-chat
mailing list