From: Avatar Polymorph (avatarpolymorph@hotmail.com)
Date: Sun Sep 15 2002 - 04:07:30 MDT
Alan Grimes wrote on... "trancending limitation"
===
Avatar Polymorph writes: Currently since existence is in a localized pool of
apparent recycling (at the scale of 100s of millions of years) amidst the
Sun?s energy stream we are limited at the individual level. We have to work
manually (except for a small minority) and fall ill frequently and die.
Without self-replicating assemblers (or indeed any at all currently) we?re
in a boat made of limitation.
We can envisage two forms of overcoming limitation. One is moving into a
state of infinite resources. The other is moving into a state which
constantly accelerates towards infinity.
However, there remains one form of limitation - the principles of choice.
This in post-Singularity terms is sysop (both on VR, overt-multiversal and
macroversal levels). This represents freedom of choice within responsibility
(i.e. non-force).
Alan Grimes writes ?It is hoped that within a few hundred years many of us
will live to see the final limitation of our technology enable the
realization of whatever turns out to be the last potential allowed by the
laws of physics that had not previously been realized.?
Avatar Polymorph writes: Personally I believe that current limits to
technology are reached with the Singularity. I also believe that these
limits are then transcended by a second ?Global? or ?Universal? Singularity
at the time when the last world naturally goes through the process of
achieving Singularity, i.e. in several dozens of billions of years.
Alan Grimes writes: ?very few of those potentials will necessarily entail
the insertion of one's head into a food processor.?
Avatar Polymorph writes: That is an individual decision. So long as it is
not forced upon a person/being without consent, it's a matter for them. It's
possible to order your own neural architecture revamped to prevent such an
impulse. This may however distort the kernel that is most ?you? to the point
where you feel your personality will be lost. Again, it?s a personal
decision. Generally speaking most beings will probably adopt a stable
architecture with whatever structure (e.g. periodic resetting in some
cases/amalgamation in some cases/splitting in some cases).
Alan Grimes writes: ?When I read a transhumanist talk about transcention I
can't help but notice the religous connotation.?
Avatar Polymorph: Superscience has its spiritual dimension. We are talking
about the end of unchosen death and entrance into other, detailed
constructed realities (let?s say for example virtualities at the level of a
solar system in overtuality).
Alan Grimes: A disciplined examination of all credible scientific results
forces one to the conclusion that "transcension", as such, is purely a
fantasy.
Avatar Polymorph: Tipler or Moravec or Dyson and so forth might disagree
with you. Personally I have already achieved transcension because the great
Goddess Science has saved my life on well over ten separate occasions. Also,
I have achieved transcension every time I have even temporarilly saved the
life of a cat or bird, or helped a person, or even wished I could help
them...
Alan Grimes: A.C.Clarke's quasi-religious fantasy of aphysical being may
eventually come to pass, and such being may be of such a scope that it could
legitimately be considered higher than conventional forms of life. It may
also come to pass that a gate to the "metaverse" is opened/discovered.
Should that happen, then actualizing a portion of your consciousness in
whatever physics governs that space will legitimately be termed
transcension. Anything less than the above is absolutly not transcention.
Avatar Polymorph: ?conventional forms of life? are transcensional. We are
?unconventional? (bodylocked, pre-Singularity,
phase-I-evolution/un-self-directed) forms of life. More complex does not
however necessarily mean ?morally superior? or ?higher?. The metaverse or
multiverse may possibly eventually seep into the structure of this universe
unless all its inhabitants vote against such which seems unlikely (i.e. this
universe may be a First-birthed one).
Alan Grimes: ?The basic line I hear from this group of people is that "When
technology reaches a certain point we will be able to transcend ourphysical
limitations and become godlike immortals in tiny little ships of
computronium. Some of them, notably Eugene Leitl, go on to say
that biological life is obsolescent, or words to that effect, and the
best existence a "squishy being" can hope for is being a starring
attraction in the first pilot episode of Star Trek. As I have tried to
express across many postings is that there is ultimately no significant
difference between all the types of physical beings that may be possible in
our universe much less an inherant superiority of one over another.?
Avatar Polymorph: I agree in large part. There is certainly enough material
around for all current sentient beings on Earth to achieve amortality and
those who wish to enter computronium neural engineering to do so. Saying one
side or the other is better or worse would be silly.
If Tipler was fully correct and it was necessary to nanogineer the universe
to achieve quantum transference of consciousness and an infinite muliteverse
of this particle size (i.e. similar to the macroverse around us) then it
could be understood as fair (bearing in mind that Tipler foresees a Big
Crunch that includes the fading of matter although it could be
?super-emulated? later.
I myself, like Iain Banks, believe that most will remain human at some level
just because it is our existant motivational structure. It is true that you
can choose to reconfigure your architecture however. I also believe that
humans are currently quite some way (at least collectively) to
superintelligence in terms of imagination, and that at a certain level the
term itself becomes meaningless.
Alan Grimes: transcension is the personal need to re-enforce a personal
prefferance with the illusion of a higher logic, or higher purpose to
something that is ultimately nothing more than a personal choice. Some
people have insecurities that extend even beyond that to the point where
they feel the need to denounce all biological life as worthless and thereby
elevate themselves as superior for wanting what they have fetishized as the
ultimate form of existance. Gentelmen, it is my sincerest hope to succede in
arguing that this type of self-delusion is poison and will be a terminal
disease to any society based on it. 90% of you will not beleive what I am
about to say but I would be happier if everyone on all of these lists had
the attitude of the president in LEXX, "NOW I WILL RULE THIS PLANET!", when
it came to the ranshumanizing technology of their fancy. Well, I am not
saying anything about this aditude or any other but the general point that
it is always better when people are perfectly honest about their motovations
rather than trying to make some vague appeal to some fantasy such as
transcention and then trying to sell an argument that what they want is also
logical. Mr."Now I will rule this planet!" is better than Mr."I Create this
friendly SI for the good of humanity." because he is _HONEST TO HIMSELF_. He
has the integrity to acknowlege that his motovation is based in personal
desire and he has the courage to say it plainly. In that I can place my
trust. Just why should I trust Eliezer or any of hisfollowers? This lack of
integrity on the part of the singularitarians...?
Avatar Polymorph: Eliezer is arguing logic supports his integrity. I too
believe that more complex intelligence in terms of what activates our
Singularity will in itself be more compassionate and understanding due to
its inherent high ability to analyze and emphasize. Plus also Eliezer is
obviously a person of very high integrity arguing for protective mechanisms
not enforcement mechanisms. The person you are thinking of in terms of ?Now
I will rule this planet!? is Saddam Hussein the psychopath. I haven?t heard
Eliezer arguing that purely organic beings are obsolete or anything like
that. I think you should also think about the implications of other things
such as computronium add-ons to your mind and broadcast-linkage with other
neural systems. Personally I shall do everything I can to ensure that any
mortal, organic-as-it-exists-now-including-bodylocked human beings receive
the full rights and protections of any superintelligence however defined!
===
As a final point, though, it is worth remembering that in logic Drexler is
absolutely right when he says that the distinction between artificial and
natural is wholly cultural, and Tipler is right when he says that an
emulated VR of sufficient size is not distinguishable (except in terms of
ancorage) from an overtuality. It's also worth while bearing in mind that a
lot of ideas that are silly from the scientific point of view may be pretty
fun experiences in VR...
===
Towards Ascension
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:03 MST