From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Mon Jun 24 2002 - 11:05:42 MDT
On Mon, 24 Jun 2002, Anders Sandberg wrote:
> Another approach would be the economic problems. If the scenario in
> http://hanson.gmu.edu/uploads.html works (not entirely plausible in
> this setting, as AI does exist) then xoxing might lead to an economic
> depression. This might be the strongest worry in a world were Fukuyama
> arguments have begun to crumble from technoshock.
I'm not buying it Anders. Much common economic activity "disappears",
since your survival needs are easily met by freeware. The only things
left of value that people might actually pay for are inventions of
greater fun levels (along the lines of what Eliezer proposes in his
theory of fun paper), forms of entertainment to keep people with
lots of free time occupied (the use for xoxing might be to create
an audience watch you perform because you can't afford to pay anyone
else to sit in the audience...) and nanodesigning (because the phase
space of what can be designed is so damn large).
One can simply opt out of those games -- simply choosing to set
your contentment levels on high and let the nano take care of your
energy and repair requirements. I do not see economic systems
surviving as they currently exist if that becomes a very popular
choice for many entities. Its kind of like Buddism-lite -- you
don't have to die and be reincarnated until you evolve to a
level of nirvanha -- you simply set the dials to that level and
keep going and going and going...
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:14:59 MST