DanielLC comments on Ideas wanted: democracy in an Em world - Less Wrong

1 Post author: Stuart_Armstrong 06 June 2013 02:05PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (64)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: DanArmak 06 June 2013 04:03:53PM 7 points [-]

Democracy is a political system used by meat-based, baseline humans, who are all fundamentally very similar. The greatest variation is that between Einstein and the village idiot, but 99% of people are far from either extreme.

One of the key ideas leading to democracy is equal rights. It makes sense to give all humans equal rights because their abilities, needs, and desires are really very similar. But ems inhabit a far greater class of possible behaviors, abilities, needs and desires. It's not clear to me why it even makes sense to consider a democracy of ems.

Another problem is that, as you point out, a one instance-one vote system would create a huge artificial restriction on the creation of legal copies. Creating copies is probably very desirable for anyone rich enough to run them. So the only possible outcomes are either a huge majority of disenfranchised copies created without a license, or else a huge illegal underworld of copies that is brutally repressed by the government because, once a copy is created, they have to grant it full rights.

Just look at the state of modern copyright (and patents) - a huge artificial legal restriction on the proliferation of software. Then imagine copyright applied to sentient beings. Enforcing a system of government licensing of em copying would mean enforcing the non-existence of free software and open hardware, or any software or hardware free from government control.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 06 June 2013 05:15:08PM 4 points [-]

An alternative might be to grant new copies votes after a some moderate period of time so that they've diverged from the original. This no doubt has its own problems, but it's at least good enough for science fiction.

A requirement to have a percentage of divergence would be too easy to hack.

Comment author: DanielLC 07 June 2013 01:18:05AM 4 points [-]

In a sense, we do that now. You're free to have children and teach them your values, but they can't vote for 18 years.

Comment author: Stuart_Armstrong 07 June 2013 07:28:32AM 0 points [-]

Do you think this idea can be generalised to Ems?

Comment author: warbo 13 June 2013 04:38:49PM 1 point [-]

We can generalise votes to carry different weights. Starting today, everyone who currently has one vote continues to have one vote. When someone makes a copy (electronic or flesh), their voting power is divided between themselves and the copy. The total amount of voting power is conserved and, assuming that copies default to the political opinion of their prototypes, the political landscape only moves when someone changes their mind.

Comment author: Baughn 07 June 2013 04:01:16PM 0 points [-]

Dubious at best. Ems could be designed to not diverge, and there's evolutionary pressure towards doing so.

Comment author: DanielLC 07 June 2013 09:07:00PM 1 point [-]

It would at least keep people from just multiplying themselves right before an election and then merging them again right after.