From: Philip Sutton (Philip.Sutton@green-innovations.asn.au)
Date: Thu May 29 2003 - 15:01:37 MDT
Dear Eliezer,
In reply to Bill Hibberd you said:
> Congratulations. You've just ruled out SIAI's Friendly AI architecture
> and mandated one that is basically, fundamentally flawed.
Following this there was quite a bit of text saying how silly you thought
Bill's ideas were.
But I can't see anything in your email that substantiates your starting
proposition. *Why* did Bill's proposal mandate a flawed approach to
FAI?
I would like you to explain why in language that a non-mathematican
can understand. If you can't get around to explaining your ideas in a
form that an intelligent, informed non-mathematician can understand
then you are commiting yourself to fail to communicate with the people
you want to pusuade not to adopt Bill's approach. And so if this failure
continues then people could justifiably say that *you* "have one
subjunctive planetary kill on your record".
Cheers, Philip
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:42 MDT