Worried about uploading the human mind to robots
Note that he doesn't like the survival of the stronger
This from Cosmic Engineers:
In a future with uploads, human minds are ultra abundant. They can exert themselves
anywhere, anytime, anyplace. If that is in fact paired with material affluence (and aquiring
money), the individuals who have means will attract more means exponentially so, and
displace those with less. i.e. you get radical disparity in minutes. and it doesn't end there -
those with an ultra-consolidated hold on society will imprint their values (say, very rich
uploaded wahabi, or russian gangsters, or ex dictators or fox managers or former oil people) on
society, and thee values may not be the noblest values.
Democratic systems will push back against disquality and inequality. It must push back
against the values and goals of single individuals, because society will over all not share their
values. The scary part is this won't happen in some countries, such as dubai, and the end
game there looks decidedly bleaker for those not on the winning side.
I have argued in the past that disparities of affluence and political influence will almost
certainly magnify into existential risks. I argued to the Lifeboat Foundation to include
Disparity as an existential risk, but so far the notion seems politically taboo.
The compromise (and I agree, not the ideal situation) is curtailment - laws. Society (and
probably the overarching community of nations) will step in to curtail personal manifestation.
That means an AI girl taking over the 7/11 nanofacs, and soon after Idoru crawls out of the
replicators in every printer of every store all over the world will be illegal. At some point states
may declare overexertion illegal.
We are close to that point already and I am voting for it. For example, I do not condone that
certain religious minorities have active displacement strategies by having many offspring
(over 5 children) and I would push for laws outlawing parenting of more than 4 children. Yes
this offends many people, and is belittling and patronizing and very rude, but I base my
preference on my insights of the severity of the situation.
At heart I am a pandorist- I want as many people as free as possible to do as much as they can
and like, but in the real world I am a anti-displacist. I don't like nature, where everything is
constantly eating and killing other things. I suppose I am against zero sumism. I can't stand
marginalization - not because I particularly like latter-day marginalized (I personally can't
stand that category of soccer watching simpletons in my country) but rather because I find
myself marginalized and I know how dangerous it is.
There could be other reasons, though. Can anyone think of another
reason why an upload is restricted to one machine as its substrate?
Note that he doesn't like the survival of the stronger
This from Cosmic Engineers:
In a future with uploads, human minds are ultra abundant. They can exert themselves
anywhere, anytime, anyplace. If that is in fact paired with material affluence (and aquiring
money), the individuals who have means will attract more means exponentially so, and
displace those with less. i.e. you get radical disparity in minutes. and it doesn't end there -
those with an ultra-consolidated hold on society will imprint their values (say, very rich
uploaded wahabi, or russian gangsters, or ex dictators or fox managers or former oil people) on
society, and thee values may not be the noblest values.
Democratic systems will push back against disquality and inequality. It must push back
against the values and goals of single individuals, because society will over all not share their
values. The scary part is this won't happen in some countries, such as dubai, and the end
game there looks decidedly bleaker for those not on the winning side.
I have argued in the past that disparities of affluence and political influence will almost
certainly magnify into existential risks. I argued to the Lifeboat Foundation to include
Disparity as an existential risk, but so far the notion seems politically taboo.
The compromise (and I agree, not the ideal situation) is curtailment - laws. Society (and
probably the overarching community of nations) will step in to curtail personal manifestation.
That means an AI girl taking over the 7/11 nanofacs, and soon after Idoru crawls out of the
replicators in every printer of every store all over the world will be illegal. At some point states
may declare overexertion illegal.
We are close to that point already and I am voting for it. For example, I do not condone that
certain religious minorities have active displacement strategies by having many offspring
(over 5 children) and I would push for laws outlawing parenting of more than 4 children. Yes
this offends many people, and is belittling and patronizing and very rude, but I base my
preference on my insights of the severity of the situation.
At heart I am a pandorist- I want as many people as free as possible to do as much as they can
and like, but in the real world I am a anti-displacist. I don't like nature, where everything is
constantly eating and killing other things. I suppose I am against zero sumism. I can't stand
marginalization - not because I particularly like latter-day marginalized (I personally can't
stand that category of soccer watching simpletons in my country) but rather because I find
myself marginalized and I know how dangerous it is.
There could be other reasons, though. Can anyone think of another
reason why an upload is restricted to one machine as its substrate?
 |