<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.1.3" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Condé Nast Portfolio, &#8220;Never Say Die&#8221;</title>
	<link>http://www.singinst.org/blog/2007/11/23/conde-nast-portfolio-never-say-die/</link>
	<description>The Singularity Institute exists to confront the challenge of powerful AI, both the opportunity and the risk.</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 12:24:02 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1.3</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy P. Brody</title>
		<link>http://www.singinst.org/blog/2007/11/23/conde-nast-portfolio-never-say-die/#comment-16038</link>
		<author>Jeremy P. Brody</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Nov 2007 20:56:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.singinst.org/blog/2007/11/23/conde-nast-portfolio-never-say-die/#comment-16038</guid>
					<description>Is life extension really that closely connected to the Singularity, which, as Eliezer defines it, is the greater-than-human-intelligence? Yes, life is important, and yes, we want to live until smarter entities can truly solve our problems, but I'd say the main connection is that both are part of the transhumanist drive to break through our human limitations. Valuable, yes, but part of the SIAI mission?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is life extension really that closely connected to the Singularity, which, as Eliezer defines it, is the greater-than-human-intelligence? Yes, life is important, and yes, we want to live until smarter entities can truly solve our problems, but I&#8217;d say the main connection is that both are part of the transhumanist drive to break through our human limitations. Valuable, yes, but part of the SIAI mission?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tyler Emerson</title>
		<link>http://www.singinst.org/blog/2007/11/23/conde-nast-portfolio-never-say-die/#comment-16049</link>
		<author>Tyler Emerson</author>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Nov 2007 21:20:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.singinst.org/blog/2007/11/23/conde-nast-portfolio-never-say-die/#comment-16049</guid>
					<description>Not directly, but a likely consequence of success. A number of us at SIAI support Methuselah, including myself, so we take opportunities to reference their work.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not directly, but a likely consequence of success. A number of us at SIAI support Methuselah, including myself, so we take opportunities to reference their work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Gusek</title>
		<link>http://www.singinst.org/blog/2007/11/23/conde-nast-portfolio-never-say-die/#comment-16137</link>
		<author>Michael Gusek</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Nov 2007 04:23:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.singinst.org/blog/2007/11/23/conde-nast-portfolio-never-say-die/#comment-16137</guid>
					<description>Hi, Jeremy.

I am no expert, but I do percieve a trend of our machines getting closer and closer to directly interfacing with our biology.  Along with this probable development is the choice to partake in that interface.  A boiling frog scenario may be that our machines make us smarter from the inside out as the singularity period progresses.

I personally believe that living well and extending life now will give one the chance of choosing to participate in this later.

I cannot comment about this being part of the SIAI mission, but I can see where the two intersect.

Go Aubrey! (And, of course, Tyler...)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi, Jeremy.</p>
<p>I am no expert, but I do percieve a trend of our machines getting closer and closer to directly interfacing with our biology.  Along with this probable development is the choice to partake in that interface.  A boiling frog scenario may be that our machines make us smarter from the inside out as the singularity period progresses.</p>
<p>I personally believe that living well and extending life now will give one the chance of choosing to participate in this later.</p>
<p>I cannot comment about this being part of the SIAI mission, but I can see where the two intersect.</p>
<p>Go Aubrey! (And, of course, Tyler&#8230;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick Tarleton</title>
		<link>http://www.singinst.org/blog/2007/11/23/conde-nast-portfolio-never-say-die/#comment-16151</link>
		<author>Nick Tarleton</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Nov 2007 05:15:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.singinst.org/blog/2007/11/23/conde-nast-portfolio-never-say-die/#comment-16151</guid>
					<description>If developing FAI takes an extremely long time, it would be helpful for the developers not to have to die of old age in the meantime.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If developing FAI takes an extremely long time, it would be helpful for the developers not to have to die of old age in the meantime.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert Dziekan</title>
		<link>http://www.singinst.org/blog/2007/11/23/conde-nast-portfolio-never-say-die/#comment-16243</link>
		<author>Robert Dziekan</author>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Nov 2007 14:50:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.singinst.org/blog/2007/11/23/conde-nast-portfolio-never-say-die/#comment-16243</guid>
					<description>Nick, I agree. However, I think its important that this work, the development of FAI, be completed as soon as possible. My concern is that an overenthusiastic proponent of AI will develop a system that isn't well thought-out of planned. In other words, The SIAI seems to be encouraging the intelligent and ethical development of AI, a FAI. A less reckless group might not be thinking so logically, but put just as much energy into bringing their own AI vision to fruition. Do you suppose the rise of AI will be like the space race? A matter of who gets there first? Do you suppose the development of FAI will negate the need for any other groups to develop an alternate AI system, friendly or not? I think perhaps I went off on a few tangents, I apologize...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nick, I agree. However, I think its important that this work, the development of FAI, be completed as soon as possible. My concern is that an overenthusiastic proponent of AI will develop a system that isn&#8217;t well thought-out of planned. In other words, The SIAI seems to be encouraging the intelligent and ethical development of AI, a FAI. A less reckless group might not be thinking so logically, but put just as much energy into bringing their own AI vision to fruition. Do you suppose the rise of AI will be like the space race? A matter of who gets there first? Do you suppose the development of FAI will negate the need for any other groups to develop an alternate AI system, friendly or not? I think perhaps I went off on a few tangents, I apologize&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Life Sentence: Immortality &#171; Joe Duck</title>
		<link>http://www.singinst.org/blog/2007/11/23/conde-nast-portfolio-never-say-die/#comment-18177</link>
		<author>Life Sentence: Immortality &#171; Joe Duck</author>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Dec 2007 05:05:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.singinst.org/blog/2007/11/23/conde-nast-portfolio-never-say-die/#comment-18177</guid>
					<description>[...] Conde Nast on Kurzweil [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Conde Nast on Kurzweil [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
