Summary: Aristotelianism considered harmful; Hilbert Space is the new industry standard.

Eliezer proposed the idea that "if you looked at the history of England, you would find a smooth improvement in living conditions corresponding to a gradually more plausible threat of revolution".

According to Eric Hoffer, the above is true. However, the direction of causation is the reverse of what one would expect. Improved living conditions precede revolutionary sentiment.

A conscious mind on a protein-based computer? You expect me to believe in sentient MEAT!?

As an interesting aside, I believe calorie-counting isn't done in the stomach. However, protein content is measured directly at the taste buds. Which explains why MSG tastes so good, and makes a light meal seem more filling. At least until digestion has started and the expected barrage of amino acids is somehwat lacking.

Addendum: In computational terms, you can't avoid using a 'hack'. Maybe not the hack you described, but something, somewhere has to be hard-coded. How else would you avoid solipsism?

I have to go with Tom McGabe on this one; This is just a restatement of the core problem of epistemology. It's not unique to AI, either.

Eliezer, when you're lost in an unfamiliar neighbourhood, do sit back, relax and wait for evidence of your location to come in? Obviously not, since you're still alive and haven't yet starved to death. Well guess what, none of *my* direct ancestors starved to death before they reproduced either. That's a scientific fact, and it just goes to show that when it comes to the thinking game, nothing succeeds like success.

And success is not the same as accuracy, except in a mystical world of spherical cows of uniform density. In the real world, the value of a perfectly correct decision which takes an infinate amount of time to evaluate is exactly 0. [Note the lack of units - renormalize if you dare.] I have empirical data showing that this world contains distinctly heterogenous cows. Reprints available upon request.