bintchaos

here is the question i was going to ask then: Given that someone, somewhere is going to build a "better" human (or AI) isnt it imperative that America does it first? thats a paraphrase of an old Dr. Hawking quote

well im totes for that-- Dr. Carroll has a great approach-- do u read him? as a poet-mathematician you would be a great candidate for the first wave of educators-- my dream would be to make America a nation of citizen scientists and citizen educators-- an open university for the world instead of trying to bomb ppl into submission-- educate them! :)

it seems like we have such such amazing resources on the web-- free college courses, MITExplorer, Coursera, the Santa Fe institute and much more-- but to take the really exciting upper level classes in complexity, cosmology, chaos theory, fractals, nonlinear system dynamics, etc, one needs the mathematical base-- there has to to be way to give kids that.

would a digital imprint loaded into a surrogate be artificial intelligence at all? it would just be a copy of the human intelligence whether its Kurzweil or Itskov-- not AI, but an artificial body. im not sure that a silicon intelligence would have any resemblance to a carbon based one.

Do you discriminate between Strong AI, Friendly AI and General AI? or is it all just bad interspecies competition? What if we could build Friendly AI into Humanist AI? i know your argument is that we cant build an AI because of Gödel, but Hawkings argument (which he may reject today) is that someone is going to do it. Shouldn't we be trying to make it as safe as possible?