Isaiah Berlin once wrote, “We cannot legislate
for unknown consequences of consequences of consequences.”
He wasn’t making a statement about the mind’s resemblance to a broken record,
it wasn’t that he COULD NOT GET OVER consequences.
He was making a deep point about science and society…in the 20th century.
But suppose we produce a scientific approach that gets uncommonly robust forecasts
from cadres of superintelligent autonomous nano-brains,
and they all vote on a spectrum;
and suppose we decide to value their opinions?
We have so much that is known so well, an overdetermination of excellent forecasts. Is that so remarkably impossible? I mean, we get that
with global circulation models — which by the way aren’t so autonomous
or superintelligent and super excellent.
But would we legislate for consequences of consequences of consequences if they were OVERKNOWN?
???.
When we have all the terrible nightmares of the world and bright dreams to be thinking, what can we do?
agilekeys 