Categories:
Growth: Consequences
To help write his book in progress, Robin Hanson is looking for a word to describe the set of things that are EITHER (a) biological humans OR (b) artificial intelligences. At my urging, he’s set up a survey on QuickSurveys to solicit your suggestions. Please help Robin out!
To rephrase, Robin wants a word that describes BOTH biological humans AND artificial intelligences. He’s NOT looking for a word that singles out (a) artificial intelligences alone, or (b) hybrid creatures.
Thanks in advance – and please repost and Tweet.
Update: To reveal more than the first 100 answers, SurveyMonkey wanted $200. So Robin moved the survey over QuickSurveys. The link above reflects the change.
READER COMMENTS
sieben
Sep 7 2012 at 2:07pm
Relevant… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Weakness_of_Turing_test_1.svg
Robinson
Sep 7 2012 at 2:12pm
Can/should this set include nonhuman organisms (say chimpanzees or dolphins?)
MikeP
Sep 7 2012 at 2:17pm
My question is whether these “artificial intelligences” are actually intelligent or more like the utterly unintelligent things we call “artificial intelligence” today.
I answered the monkey presuming the former.
Floccina
Sep 7 2012 at 2:44pm
Intelins
Acad Ronin
Sep 7 2012 at 2:49pm
Sentents – sentient entities
MikeP
Sep 7 2012 at 2:56pm
Voters
Fonzy Shazam
Sep 7 2012 at 3:16pm
On the original test at Survey Monkey, it allowed a write-in answer to which I responded “Thinkers”. But a write-in option didn’t appear on the QuickSurveys version.
sieben
Sep 7 2012 at 3:37pm
My original speculation was that both Brian and Robin had bet that a particular name would be more popular than the rest.
It now occurs to me that one of them may be betting against any sort of consensus.
Nathan Smith
Sep 7 2012 at 4:35pm
“Cogitants” is the best I can think of. It’s not a pure neologism, I think; it’s sort of crypto-English already, since “cogitate” means think and the suffix “-ant” can mean “one who,” as in attendant, defendant, assistant. Alternatively, “cogitator” or– this is more of a pure neologism– “cogitor.” A strange alternative that I like is “noet,” rhymes with poet, akin to words like “noetic” (having to do with the mind/spirit) and “noosphere,” the realm of ideas. “All cogitors, human and mechanical, are able to use systems of arbitrary symbols to *refer* to, or be mapped onto, real entites…” Hmm, interesting.
MingoV
Sep 7 2012 at 5:00pm
Intellentity = intelligent entity
Nathan
Sep 7 2012 at 5:01pm
I think he’d get a better quality overall response if the options were displayed in a random order. I refreshed it a couple times and it didn’t look like that was the case.
Brian
Sep 7 2012 at 5:44pm
Taxpayers
Hana
Sep 7 2012 at 5:50pm
Keep it simple. Creatures possessing the traits are “Ons”, those lacking are “Nons”
Vinnie
Sep 7 2012 at 6:27pm
To echo Nathan, I think the lack of randomization is a big problem. I voted for “agents.” I can’t entirely ascribe my decision to its placement at the top of the list; I genuinely believe I like it most. But I can’t be sure.
Les Cargill
Sep 7 2012 at 10:21pm
How about Hal? Human/Alternate … something something. “l” could stand for “lingual”, which might an adjective which can be nouned.
Paul
Sep 7 2012 at 11:56pm
Why not follow the Buddhists and just call them sentient beings? That way you can also include the Raksas, Gandharvas, Devas, Yaksas, and the hungry ghosts.
I wonder which group of mythical beings artificial intelligence will most closely resemble. Hopefully not the Raksas or hungry ghosts.
John Dougan
Sep 10 2012 at 6:20pm
There is already a word for this: sophont
Comments are closed.