[Blabber] George Dyson on the Origins of Computing
rendall at gmail.com
Thu Apr 12 13:27:49 EDT 2012
... because those things are vulnerable in the same ways as artificial
intelligence? Really? If we're talking metaphors, I imagine AI as more
similar to the spread of a technology or culture, which are vulnerable to
fads and collective whimsy, but not so much to deliberate attempts to stamp
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Jeff McCrum <mccrum at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Why wouldn't AI reveal itself to us?"
> Because if AI has been paying any attention, it's going to read about the
> dodo, the passenger pigeon, and Madison Square Garden Station and realize
> we'll do the same to it given the chance.
> Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 12:52:17 -0400
> From: rendall at gmail.com
> To: blabber at hackmanhattan.danielpacker.org
> Subject: [Blabber] George Dyson on the Origins of Computing
> The article linked below included this statement by George Dyson: "I
> believe that if there *were* a true artificial intelligence, it would be
> smart enough not to reveal itself to us."
> That strikes me as an impossible-to-prove assertion, rather like the
> existence of invisible pink unicorns or that we all live in a simulacrum,
> but is it? How would you go about proving, or disproving, the existence of
> hiding AI? Why wouldn't AI reveal itself to us?
> The books he reviews themselves are interesting, and some are definitely
> going on my to-read list!
> _______________________________________________ Blabber mailing list
> Blabber at hackmanhattan.danielpacker.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Blabber