Yvain "anyone has some clever reason why elves are worse than Sauron."
Brin has some interesting comments, including "Now ponder something that comes through even the party-line demonization of a crushed enemy -- this clear-cut and undeniable fact: Sauron's army was the one that included every species and race on Middle Earth, including all the despised colors of humanity, and all the lower classes."
Two other examples of sciences where the vocabulary is less formal than is typical:
Astronomy: "star", "black hole" (as compared to e.g. deoxyribonucleic acid)
Genetics: names of genes have included "fruity", "shaven baby" and "killer of prune"
@Jordan - agreed.
I think the big difference in expected complexity is between sampling the
space of possible singletons' algorithms results and sampling the space of
competitive entities. I agree with Eliezer that an imprecisely
chosen value function, if relentlessly optimized, is likely to yield a dull
universe. To my mind the key is that the ability to relentlessly
optimize one function only exists if a singleton gets and keeps an
overwhelming advantage over everything else. If this does not happen, we
get competing entities with the computationally difficult problem of
outsmarting each other. Under this scenario, while I might not like the
detailed results, I'd expect them to be complex to much the same extent
and for much the same reasons as living organisms are complex.
I look at Causes as hedonic accessories from a different point of view: Given the history of how many Causes have turned out to contain purple kool-aid, I look at the problem as not so much "how can we carefully select rationally desirable Causes" but more nearly "How can we bypass this part of the human mental landscape altogether - preferably aquiring the hedonic gains of adopting a Cause, while skipping the hazards, both to oneself and to those around one, of actually adopting one."
"Where 'nonsentient romantic/sex partner' is pretty much what I use the word "catgirl" to indicate, in futuristic discourse." - 40 comments in this thread, and not a word about Kzin?
One arguably plausible change, that is arguably an improvement (of sorts), and yet would be a shock
could be if techniques for assessing individuals' abilities became much more accurate. We could wind
up with a world with elments of GATTACA or Brave New World (albeit this alone wouldn't do the equivalent
of bottle-farming deltas...). To an extent things like IQ already do this, but more precise, specific
assessments (if human abilities are actually stable enough over time for this to be possible) would be
a large blow to both traditional views of human equality and to individuals' dreams of the range of
their possible futures. It would also be very politically incorrect, at least in some circles.