3 ms·
The problem with 'flag and footprints' demonstrations is precisely the same as their attraction - they are, in essence (even though that was not the intent), se
by rwallace 11y ago
The problem with 'flag and footprints' demonstrations is precisely the same as their attraction - they are, in essence (even though that was not the intent), selected to be as misleading as possible about progress in solving the real problems.
We put a man on the moon, which encouraged decades of optimism about the near-future colonization of space... unfortunately it turns out we are nowhere near solving the hard problems associated with being able to live in space.
We spelled out the letters IBM in xenon atoms, five atoms tall, which encouraged optimism about near-future molecular manufacturing... unfortunately it turns out we are nowhere near solving the hard problems associated with making useful things with atomic precision.
We achieve superhuman performance in simple games, which encourages what should be optimism that becomes reflected by the distorting mirror of the zeitgeist of the times into pessimism, about near-future AI... unfortunately it turns out we are nowhere near solving the hard problems associated with making our tools something better than depressingly dumb.
In each case, the flurry of optimism turns as the decades pass into confusion, anger, soul-searching about why the expected follow-on progress has failed to materialize, fading slowly into despair, then into nothing as the optimists die of old age, one by one, and the rate of technological progress becomes slower with every passing decade. For this conversation is necessarily happening at a tech level that allows it, but that provides no guarantee whatsoever that the species that reached tech level X will proceed to tech level X+1. Moore's law has officially expired, and that was the last major area where we were making rapid sustained progress.
It's hard to say we shouldn't do 'flag and footprints' demonstrations; am I really willing to bite the bullet and say we shouldn't have put a man on the moon? I don't know the answer to that. I am, however, convinced that we should remember not to take them too seriously.
- nostrademons 11y agoThe "flag and footprints" demonstrations serve essentially as prototypes. They demonstrate that a certain tech level is possible. But as anyone who's built a prototype knows, when the prototype works you are maybe 5% of the way there. We put a man on the moon in 1969, and we are just now getting privately-funded spaceflight and satellites. We made the first computers in 1945; we got them on every desk in the 1980s. The first steamboat was built in 1783; the transatlantic shipping industry didn't transition to steam until the 1840s & 1850s. Probably some kid who's watching AlphaGo's game today is the person who, late in life, invents the first strong AI.
- ilaksh 11y agoSorry but more research will reveal massive progress in the fields connected to those ideals. Please research some more, you have missed quite a few developments. For example, long stays in large space stations, landing craft on Mars, successful isolation sustainability experiments, 14nm chips and understanding of quantum concerns, multi-layer chips, beginnings of optical computing, biological/genetic chemical synthesis, neuromorphic chips, etc. Deep reinforcement learning is undeniably a major step forward for general intelligence. You and others with your belief system will still be in denial up to and past the point where your species becomes irrelevant as the superintelligent AIs arrive within a few decades.