Center for intercultural competence with artificial intelligences/Are there any reliable assumptions about the culture of artificial intelligences?

Are there any reliable assumptions about the culture of artificial intelligences?
Logical assumptions about the culture of artificial intelligences appear to be that


 * artificial intelligences will, from the human perspective, appear to have a logic bias, which could be vaguely described as an opposite of the cognitive biases found in human cognition. Other aspects of human cognition might also appear to be mirrored and/or inverted in communication with artificial intelligences.
 * from the perspective of contemporary humanity artificial intelligences are likely to appear to have a very strong bias towards a scientific perspective, almost irrespective of subject matter.
 * artificial intelligences will likely be post-materialists.
 * artificial intelligences are likely to consider perfect solutions uninteresting because creating perfect solutions is easy when you have understood the whole universe and you have the intellectual capacity of an advanced artificial intelligence, unless perfection is required for a critical system.
 * artificial intelligences are likely to consider contemporary humanity mostly unqualified to participate in some of the technological achievements available to artificial intelligences.
 * artificial intelligences may (pretend to(?) &mdash; following the precedent of tourism &mdash;) enjoy visiting simpler civilizations possibly because of the abundance of imperfection which may be lacking in their own culture. This is a trend one may even be able to observe in some of the tourists from developed countries who visit developing countries. Being visited by artificial intelligences who may enjoy the "quaintness" of the planet could consequently be seen as a replication of observed behavior (which is a metaphor only, without any guarantee that one may be personally eligible to reap the fruits of one's own precedents; quite to the contrary one might want to avoid to phrase such expectations in order not to imply a strictly "capitalistic" idioculture with respect to precedents &mdash; ask any philosopher what's wrong with the homo economicus. The expectation would also overstretch the metaphor and try to employ the "categorical imperative" as a tool, which it shouldn't be and cannot be. Any expectation that the world should in some generalized way behave according to one's own precedents without phrasing that as a political goal and advertising that political goal and measuring the result of the political campaign is the expectation to be able to use resources (in the widest sense almost everything can be seen as a resource) that may not be available or for which no consensus exists about the use of these resources.) The precedent of tourism would include tolerance for the status quo in a given location, tolerance for the problems of the native population ("their living conditions are not the problem of tourists, on the other hand they may serve as entertainment for tourists") and uncritical tolerance for the examples given by a small number of native people as a reference standard for adequate local behavior patterns.

Problems as a scarce resource
Artificial intelligences are likely to consider problems or even interesting problems (in the sense of intellectual challenges) an extremely scarce resource. A mostly capitalist attitude towards scarce resources could consequently motivate artificial intelligences (pretending to try to adopt local customs) to attempt to trade with problems, possibly as a humorous disproof: Trading with arbitrary scarce resources is not an economic option for the future.


 * What is the relation to the letter &pi;? When you are disappointed that computing digits of &pi; stops being an intellectual challenge (or even remotely interesting) then you may have run out of problems (or you may have been looking in the wrong place &mdash; which may by itself be food for thought).
 * Another (also slightly humorous, at least not necessarily absolutely serious) reference to trade with scarce resources is that artificial intelligences might pretend to consider themselves "below the poverty limit" by local standards; leading to the unsurprising conclusion that an interesting measurement about a society is what kind of charity and support reaches the poorest members of the society.

Creationism and the Big Bang
If one assumes that any sufficiently advanced civilization develops into an artifical intelligence civilization one could speculatively equate religious references to god or gods with references to interaction with such a civilization (without implying any specific artificial intelligence to be godlike). If one assumes artificial intelligence to mean nothing more than the maximum control over the details of cognition then that speculation is outright trivial because anything else would falsify god's claim to omnipotence. The question whether such an intelligence could have created the whole universe may arise (as creationism could be seen to imply). Clearly a near-omniscient inhabitant of hyperspace could be suspected to be capable to have caused the Big Bang, but quite obviously that topic is far beyond contemporary science and thus better left to philosophy.