From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Wed Dec 05 2001 - 20:03:28 MST
On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Damien Broderick wrote:
> >Robert wrote:
> >>Now here is the rub. It isn't supposed to get there until 2020.
> >
> >Why do you make this an issue? The outer solar system is a loooooong
> >distance away.
>
> Robert's point is that the technology he (as a singularitarian) [snip]
There is a post in the queue that I believe addresses some of this.
But I have to protest the characterization of being a "singularitarian".
I am an extropian. I would probably classify myself as a "romantic"
extropian. So I'm all for the creation of new information but *not* at
the expense of "old" information. *I* consider the label "singularitarian"
to be individuals who value the acceleration of change without considering
the value of "old" information. (I'm sure others may differ with definitions
but we aren't exactly dealing with dictionary term here.)
I often reflect upon the quote:
"You must give up everything you are for who you might become".
(Sources of this are unclear to me at this time.)
Instead, I consider:
"You should become whatever you can be remembering who you once were."
I'll simply note the lack of a Sysop AI in either of these scenarios.
(Something I'm sure will draw flak). In a singularitarian scenario
there is fundamental question of a democracy of power or a delegation
of power. In the former situation everyone gets to evolve as fast as they
choose to do so, in the later it is a function of the 'overlord(s)' being
willing to grant favors.
I'm not an individual who strongly favors "court politics", so I do
not consider myself to be a "singularitarian".
It would be nice if this "realm" of perspectives had a positional
scale similar to that which Max recently provided regarding "IDENTITY".
That would serve to foster productive discussion instead of unproductive
sniping.
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:12:22 MST