From: Ka-Ping Yee (ping@lfw.org)
Date: Tue Apr 04 2000 - 19:19:15 PDT
On Tue, 4 Apr 2000, Adam L. Beberg wrote:
> So when are people gonna talk about the real issues? This isn't about
> "them" it's about "us", "us" is the one that can't deal with change.
I think there was some cluefulness there. It just wasn't 100%
about the "real issues", as you say.
What i thought of the speakers:
Bill Joy: He seems to be proposing the impossible. Not part of
the "real issue" unless you believe that we can really slow it down.
Holland and Koza: They think it isn't going to happen, or that it
will take a very long time. I think they're wrong. (I posed the
question directed at Holland against his main argument that we
"didn't have enough theory" for even genetic methods to achieve AI.)
Kevin Kelly: Pundit. Entertaining, but not very substantial.
Fred Drake: Also on the sidelines. Fun, but didn't talk about
the "real issue".
--------
Kurzweil and Moravec: They are thinking about the "real issue".
Their answer is: we will integrate and augment ourselves with
the new technology. We have to adapt. It's not a bad thing.
Merkle: He and Drexler have been thinking about the "real issue"
for a long time. How do we survive Singularity? Promote serious
investigation of the issues to direct forward-thinking policy
decisions.
My personal position is that we'll never get it figured out
unless we have the right tools to create an effective group
intelligence. Hence Crit, Criticons, Roundup, etc.
(1997) http://crit.org/
(1998) http://crit.org/~ping/criticons/frames.html
(1999) http://www.lfw.org/ping/roundup.html
It's about time for my yearly idea now...
Oh, and Carey: very good of you to take notes, and thank you
for posting them here! May i forward them to others who were
not able to attend?
-- ?!ng
"There's no point in being grown up if you can't be childish sometimes."
-- Dr. Who
--BAG00912.954836857/skuld.lfw.org--
--BAH00912.954836857/skuld.lfw.org--
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Apr 04 2000 - 19:06:01 PDT