[ExI] Anthropomorphic AGI

Tue May 31 20:02:21 UTC 2011

Sometimes I think intellectuals are looking up their own asses with a rear
vision mirror.

How was one of my favorite cities?  Actually, almost everywhere but here is
favorite!  This is the first time in so many years that I have felt OK that
I need to spend some days on the beach, not at Galveston, but the Riviera or
Rio or near Medellin, where there are thousands of hot babes.    

From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Tim Halterman
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 11:41 AM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [ExI] Anthropomorphic AGI

I would rather see us create ourselves in their image.  The natural
evolution we were created by has obviously been effective over the millennia
but I think we can all see that it has become obsolete, inefficient and
mixed with out technology perhaps even harmful.  I can envision degradation
in the evolutionary advancement that our technology is propagating.
Cesarean births for example (drawn out over a long enough time frame) may
eventually result in our species being able to procreate without
technological intervention. (Genes which would have resulted in natural
failed births will be propagated to the young and passed through generation
to generation).

I hope one day we will not depend on the mixing of DNA to somewhat randomly
provide a better result, I think we're better than that.

-Tim

On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 11:11 AM, Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com>
wrote:

Frequently, when fiction ponders intelligent robots, a sexless
electronic machine is the result. This is a pure extrapolation from
the sexless personal computers we have today. And, even if computers
have a sex assigned in your language, then they all have the same sex
like any other object.

As I have been pondering what the "goal function" should be for AGIs,
I wonder if it would be better for humanity's future if AGIs had a sex
assigned. I then wonder whether some kind of artificial sex drive is
desirable, and whether their reproductive mechanism should be
analogous to human sex. This all starts to feel a bit strange, but if
you want human beings to be viewed as similar to the god-like AGIs,
then perhaps we would be smart to create them "in our own image". That
way, we would seem more like them to them, and thus, just perhaps, we
would be preserved.

Building anthropomorphic machines may be a matter of survival for
humanity. If the machines we build are sexless and asexual, it seems
that they could more easily come to the conclusion that we are
irrelevant.

In addition, much of what we see as art and beauty is based in the sex
drive. The concepts of art and beauty to asexual machines might
diverge significantly from our concepts of the same, and the world
could become a place that we would perceive to be devoid of beauty and
art. That doesn't seem to be a desirable outcome.

Similarly, if they are at least partially biological, so that they
depend upon the same environment that we do, then they will have a
better incentive to preserve the environment that we all depend upon.
If they are entirely non-biological, then there is no reason for them
to preserve the biosphere.

If we build robots in a myriad of shapes and sizes, with limbs that
are far different from ours, we make much of our infrastructure
difficult for them, and eventually, our infrastructure would not be
maintained for their benefit. This would be inconvenient, at the very
least. If robots don't excrete waste products, then what will be the
benefit to maintaining an expensive sewer system? Without sewers, it
is unlikely we'll reach life spans of 500 years... :-)

The future of human-serving architecture may depend upon building
anthropomorphic AGIs.

If robot's methods of learning are significantly different than ours,
then universities may cease to exist. Learning faster may be OK,
learning differently may not.

We may even want to instill ancestor worship as their religion... ;-)

I think there are many other areas where we risk our optimization/goal
functions drifting away from that of robots.

There are of course areas where we have common goals, such as energy
production. If we continue to design robots and AGIs like today's
vision, there may be fewer things in common and more that are
divergent.

Do we really want to break entirely from biology and evolution? Will
that doom us more certainly? Or are we worried too much about the
preservation of humanity and the biosphere? I think it's worth
worrying about.

So rather than being critical of science fiction when they create
anthropomorphic robots, perhaps we should be grateful that they are
creating a blueprint we can all live with.

In the shorter term, maybe we should start assigning a sexual
designation and individual name to our personal computers... just to
get used to the idea... :-)

-Kelly
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110531/a3aaebbb/attachment.html>