On 6/1/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Rafal Smigrodzki</b> <<a href="mailto:rafal.smigrodzki@gmail.com">rafal.smigrodzki@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<div><span class="gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
### Because the malicious can eat humans, while the nice ones have to<br>feed humans, and protect them from being eaten, and still eat<br>something to be strong enough to fight off the bad ones. In other<br>words, nice AI will have to carry a lot of inert baggage.
<br><br>And by "eating" I mean literally the destruction of humans bodies,<br>e.g. by molecular disassembly.<br></blockquote></div><br>Actually it's the other way around. Man-eating bots would have to carry a huge amount of fantastically complex baggage: the ability to survive, reproduce and adapt in the wild. (So much so, in fact, that they won't exist in the first place; it would take a Manhattan Project to create them, and who's going to pay that much money to be eaten?) Good-guy bots can delegate all that to human designers (assisted by computers that don't have to run on battery power) and factories; they can be slimmed down, specialized for killing the man-eating bots.
<br>