[ExI] taxonomy of the singularity

[John Clark]

On Thu, Oct 1, 2026 at 8:55 PM spike jones via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:


> *> In this forum, we have posted for decades about the singularity, with a
> wide spectrum of views about the future, ranging from the most pessimistic,
> Eliezer’s If Anyone (etc) to the most optimistic, John’s I for one, welcome
> our new AI overlords.  I have a moderate view (which is no surprise (being
> the record holder for most extremely moderate person)) opining that SAI
> will likely bring bad things to humanity, but it is the only plausible path
> to individual immortality, the only plausible path, no exceptions.*
>

*Eliezer is certain he knows what's going to happen, AI is going to kill us
all. But being certain and being correct are two entirely different things.
As for me I am not optimistic or pessimistic, I am uncertain. AI might kill
us all, then again it might not; I have a hard enough time predicting what
one of my fellow human beings will do, predicting what an intelligence
vastly more powerful than my own will do is hopeless.  But Spike, I agree
with you 100%, AI is the only plausible path to individual immortality. So
all we can do is put on our seatbelts and hope to survive the Singularity
meat grinder. *

*I don't know where that would put me in your proposed taxonomy. *

*John K Clark*








>
>
> OK then.  We need a more formal way to refer to these views than Eliezer’s
> pessimism, John’s optimism and spike’s moder… what is the noun form meaning
> having an extreme middle view?  Moderism?  Modism?  Moderatude?
>
>
>
> One possible way to organize the spectrum is analogous to how an
> engineering specification is structured, with each requirement having a
> unique number, or a series of numbers separated by dots.  For instance, a
> requirement for maximum temperature might be 4.3.12.2: The subsystem must
> operate at 65C.  In that case, section 4.3 contains the environmental
> requirements, 4.3.12 are the thermal requirements, 4.3.12.1 and 4.3.12.2
> are low and high temperature operating requirements for instance.
>
>
>
> OK now let the first number in this taxonomy describe the AI being aligned
> or malign.  The 1.x scenarios are ones where AI likes humans and wants to
> help us.  The 2.x are those where AI doesn’t like humans and wants to harm
> or slay us.  Let section 3.x be those cases where there are mixed views on
> the part of AI toward humans, such as AI weapons, which like their side but
> will slay the other guys.  Let 4.x be scenarios where AIs have no will at
> all, but can be harmful or helpful, but don’t care about humans or even
> know what we are.  They are just data doing what data does.
>
>
>
> Ideally we want this taxonomy to have structure, so that the second number
> describes something similar across the four main divisions.  Are there
> better ways to organize this taxonomy?  If we do this right, could we
> assign a number to every SciFi story which includes AI?
>
>
>
> spike
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20261002/59e6b351/attachment.htm>