From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Mon Sep 09 2002 - 12:38:20 MDT
On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Alex Ramonsky wrote:
> Because it's _quieter_ : )
I'll simply note that so far I don't see a rational argument for
propagation over self-preservation. Eugene seems to be making
a case that randomly sowing seeds all over the galaxy is the
best approach. I object -- most seeds never germinate. Many
that do die for lack of resources. We are still back to the
same issue -- making the case that random vectors are more
useful than directed and managed vectors. [I'll assert that
vectors cannot be productively managed over long distances
or large time delays. Given the freedom to think creatively --
evolution will occur. Limit that freedom and what is the point?]
There is also little evidence that random vectors aren't dangerous
to the source of such vectors. We are talking "rational"
beings and behaviors here. Eugene are you really saying
that you want to spawn offspring that will be more than
happy to come back and lay you out in a pool of blood at
Extro 77?
[Sidenote to Eliezer -- one can have entities that exhibit
entirely moral behavior [so from external observations are
"trustable"] that have an internal agenda against a specific
and precise enemy whose identiy is self-determined and cannot
be known from external observation.]
That is what terrorism and sleeper agents are all about.
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:16:52 MST