From: Lucas Sheehan (lucassheehan@gmail.com)
Date: Mon May 05 2008 - 10:35:29 MDT
On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 9:17 AM, Lucas Sheehan <lucassheehan@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 8:24 AM, Stuart Armstrong
> <dragondreaming@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > The aspect of a post-singularity world I'd like to look at is the
> > absence of signalling. If we had an advanced AI, it should be able to
> > fully understand the personality and abilities of an individual human.
> > If it would accept to reveal this information to humans, then we would
> > live in a society with perfect understanding of each other.
> >
> > This would negate the need for signaling - people would no longer be
> > driven to art, education, competitive sports, positional goods, and
> > other ways of showing off. A good proportion of the current economy
> > and culture would vanish.
> >
>
> I would have to disagree. Complete understanding does not necessarily
> imply drastic change in behavior. Humans have always overridden
> understanding and logic with emotional response. Why would my perfect
> understanding of you mean there was no longer a perceived need for
> competition, or creative expression? It could perhaps strengthen many
> of the current social behaviors. For instance it could make current
> disparities between groups much more visable and cause social rifts to
> increase as such (rich and poor for example). Of course this does not
> address the fact that a singularity might and probobly already would
> have dealt with such disparities.
>
> L.
>
Another thought specifically on art. Why would complete understanding
remove the desire for the often wonderful emotional response we
receive from art? It rarely strictly a signaling device.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:01:02 MDT