Robin Hanson <rhanson@gmu.edu> writes:
> Anders Sandberg wrote:
> >The problem is that much of the discussion about the consequences of
> >AI is currently done by AI researchers, and they do not in general
> >know much about economics, social systems, philosophy and other
> >relevant fields. This makes it common to make simplistic statements,
> >and does not further help the discourse. An economist I know simply
> >laughed at Hans Moravec's ideas of taxation of AI corporations to
> >sustain humans in a wealthy state, for example. We need to see more
> >collaboration across the disciplines here.
>
> I have made similar complaints about socially-ignorant futurist
> speculation, but taxing AIs doesn't seem crazy to this economist.
Well, he might have been too Austrian to believe in taxes. Your paper
about the economics of uploads is IMHO one of the best examples of how
to combine AI(-like) speculation and economics. I have played around
with some ideas of my own of AI-economicsin various roleplaying
settings (i.e. with no demands for a shred of stringency), and there
seem to be a vast field of interesting questions to study. Not just
whether it is rational for AIs to wipe out humans (the perennial
question humans tend to worry about) or where the jobs will go, but
also issues like how complex the economy could become.
-- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Anders Sandberg Towards Ascension! asa@nada.kth.se http://www.nada.kth.se/~asa/ GCS/M/S/O d++ -p+ c++++ !l u+ e++ m++ s+/+ n--- h+/* f+ g+ w++ t+ r+ !y
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:22 MDT