Re: The Singularity

From: Eugene Leitl (eugene@liposome.genebee.msu.su)
Date: Thu Jul 16 1998 - 07:45:30 MDT


Dan Clemmensen writes:
> My personal favorite scenario is that the SI results from a hunman/computer
> collaboration. Thus, the SI starts in symbiosis with at least one human.

Yes, mine too. Provided it will not instantly radiate explosively, and
go into limbcrushing juggernaut mode.

> I don't know what happens shortly thereafter. The most likely scenario IMO

Aye, that's the rub.

> Is an explosive growth phase based on adding computer capacity (via the net)
> without adding additional humans. Note that this is SI singular, not SI

Yes, perhaps we should should start writing blightlets for the global
networks of now and the near future -- this should steel our networks
against spontaneously emerged and deliberately constructed perversion
attacks, and make people aware of what might be coming. Human tiger
teams, so to speak. Of course we should take care not to trigger the
Big One by mistake. Little danger for it just now....

> plural, even if multiple humans are involved. At some point, the SI may

I think the emergence of SI is always singular, because it overruns
the existing substrate dish so rapidly leaving no chance to its
spontaneously emerged competitor. Though we don't now how first
autoreplicators emerged in the prebiological ursoup, I think they
might have spread as fulminantly after nucleation.

> choose to add more humans, either volunteers or draftees, and grant some

It could grow way more rapidly by autoreplication. There is little
variation between human specimens, so just a small sample would
seem to suffice, and entire world knowledge will be online by then.
(Not that I think a mere cubic meter of quantum dots will be ever
prone to a bit of artistic crisis).

> level of autonomous identity, less than, equal to, or greater than we have
> now. However, it's IMO impossible to assign a probability to any action the
> SI may choose to take that isn't precluded by the laws of physics. That's
> why I'm very interested in prognostications up to the advent of the SI, and
> relatively uninterested in the post-SI era.

Yes, it's a glass darkly. But speculation is fun!

'gene



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:49:21 MST