3 ms·

> Once you hook together the right selection of abilities, I expect something that looks suspiciously like original thought to emerge. It's very unlikely to si

• btilly 16y ago
  It's very unlikely to simply "emerge". Sure it's theoretically possible, but that's very optimistic. You are presenting a statement of opinion as if it were fact. My contrary opinion is based on a number of things. Such as the way in which computer composed music working with a database of known music is able to come up with decent compositions. And the fact that I understand the functioning of the human brain to be the interaction of multiple components, each of which has a reasonably specific function. Now this is not to say that it will happen by magic. But I fully expect AI, when it arrives, to be an emergent behavior that we no more understand in detail than we understand exactly how Google Translate comes to the translations that it comes to. (Yes, we know the algorithms. And we can tweak parameters, run it, and decide whether we think it is doing better. But tracing the logic is a lost cause.) (Yes, I know the word "intelligent" is vague, but I think you and I can at least agree that we "know it when we see it", and more technical definitions do exist.) Unfortunately we can't agree on that. Because if we set out goalposts, they will be moved when we arrive. That has been happening ever since Eliza successfully carried on conversations with people, and computers first started beating people at chess. That's why I said "suspiciously like original thought", because when it arrives, I don't expect people to accept it until after it has become clearly better than people.
  • jey 16y ago
    http://lesswrong.com/lw/iv/the_futility_of_emergence/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/iv/the_futility_of_emergence/