From: James Higgins (jameshiggins@earthlink.net)
Date: Thu Jul 04 2002 - 12:02:17 MDT
At 10:18 AM 7/4/2002 -0700, you wrote:
>On Thu, 04 July 2002, James Higgins wrote:
>
>I don't. I assume, it would be super rational, only. Otherwise, it's a
>failed Singularity. Not a friendly, at least.
>
>I see the total unpredictability of a Singularity as a myth.
>
>It's not (only) the question of the resources - it's of the morality. Some
>Powers wouldn't permit AIDS in Africa, if they were not morally defected.
>
>I can't know for sure, of course, but any "ZOO" - is highly unlikely to me.
So, you think a SI would be both "morally defected" and failed / not
friendly if it allowed individuals the choice to live and die in this
manner? Personally I think it would be much more deplorable, morally
defected and unfriendly if it insisted that all intelligent life in the
universe must subscribe to its morals.
James Higgins
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:40 MDT