I suspect that successful SIs who are still interfacing with humans will convey attributes and messages which elicit human trust, just like petting the dog conveys to the dog that you are friendly and trustworthy. And, just as we don't discuss the Extropian Principles with our pets, I doubt that the SIs will bother us with things they know we can't understand.....
Doug Bailey wrote:
>The Knowledge Question raises an interesting issue. Even if
>Strong SIs existed, how would we properly recognize them as Strong
>SIs? Since the knowledge they accessed that heralded their
>ascension to Strong SI status is beyond our ability to appreciate,
>how could we distinguish between a Strong SI and a Weak SI that
>has lost its marbles? When faced with such a choice it appears
>that our only guidance becomes the faith we have in the SI. Either
>we say, "Gee, what the SI is doing now is completely beyond me.
>Since its a SI, it probably knows what its doing. Its a Strong SI"
>or we say, "This thing has gone nuts." Another problem is
>differentiating between knowledge that is forever beyond us and
>knowledge that is beyond us for now but will be understandable
>after another 200 years of scientific work.
O--------------------------------O | Hara Ra <harara@shamanics.com> | | Box 8334 Santa Cruz, CA 95061 | | | | Death is for animals; | | immortality for gods. | | Technology is the means by |
O--------------------------------O