From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@www.aeiveos.com)
Date: Fri Oct 29 1999 - 13:08:18 MDT
On 29 Oct 1999, Anders Sandberg offered
> severali _pertinent_ comments with Medline references regarding
> psychopaths with sleep disorders and the lack of sleep in
> species in relatively safe, non-stimulating environments.
My comments.
(a) I wonder if Anders makes _impertinent_ comments when he is asleep?
(b) It will be difficult for the psychologists to separate out
the relationship between sleep & behavior disorders until
we know individual genetic profiles. There is going to be a
world of difference between someone with a hyperactive
adrenelin gene and a hyperactive clock gene but it might
be difficult to tell these apart looking at it from a
behavioral standpoint. "All will become clear in the light
of the A's, C's, G's & T's..."
(c) The fish/bird theory fits pretty well. Birds if I recall
manage by sleeping 1/2 of the brain at a time. That allows
them to do all of the memory refresh while still having
a processor online to deal with hurricanes, eagles, etc.
Fish on the other hand, in environments where there are
no significant predators could evolve to the point where
sleep for memory reinforcement isn't necessary. Interesting
that a boring, safe, environment leads to a requirement where
you don't need memories. Essentially you are always living
"in the moment" and your pre-programmed genetic behaviors are
always sufficient for survival.
*Fascinating* consequences when extended to SIs!! You pre-program
at a very low level the necessary survival mechanisms (avoid
supernovas & black holes, travel to and harvest stars or
interstellar gas clouds, change your clock rate to match the
available & predicted energy resources, etc.). After all, these
things *aren't* very complex or difficult (for an SI). Potentially
however you have no interest in the universe around you. Either (a)
you have proven it runs down enventually (so you might as well
have as much fun as possible); or (b) know that it runs down
but have 10^36 years before you have to create & tunnel into
alternate universes; or (c) know how to survive the running
down process (by changing your clock rate) and have
pre-programmed that self-modification.
Given the above, you look at the SI, its in an environment similar
to the cave-fish. It wants to *live* in the moment. Since nothing
around it is a threat (all threats being handled by preprogrammed
sub-systems) it becomes pointless to remember anything! Just
as the cave-fish doesn't need to exercise its memory pathways
to have stuff available for future recall, neither does an SI!
So all the resources get devoted to short-term memory and
computation of the current virtual reality.
Extending my "We don't talk to nematodes and SI's don't talk to us"
quote, "We don't talk to nematodes and SIs have forgotten us!"
Both humans & SIs are totally "unaware" of the things they take
for granted. Humans rarely think about or devote "long term memory"
to breathing (exceptions being scuba diving, plane decompressions,
astronauts and strangulations). Why should SIs devote thought or
attention to the universe or the sub-entities in it? *Only* if
surviving in the universe *indefinately* is a *possible*, but
*very difficult* problem, will SIs pay attention to the universe.
If its impossible or easy (which seem more probable) they may
abandon the costs of long term memory for
"Live for today, for tomorrow you *will* be dead".
or
"Live for today, for tomorrow the game is reinitialized".
So, now we are left with one final "extropic" question --
"Do you want to evolve slowly or quickly to that point?"
If the energy available to do work is finite, and if we can
use it slowly or quickly, but the work (thought quantity) that
it can accomplish is the same, which do you prefer?
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:05:39 MST