4 ms·

In Musk's defense, he was responding to questions about "general purpose" AI ( aka "real" artificial intelligence ) and how if that is achieved then we'd reach

In Musk's defense, he was responding to questions about "general purpose" AI ( aka "real" artificial intelligence ) and how if that is achieved then we'd reach a moment ( singularity ) which will fundamentally change our place in the world. That's what he called "summoning the demon" and that's a legitimate point. However, the odds of achieving true AI anytime soon is remote at best. So this guy complaint about musk has some validity too.

GeorgeTirebiter 9y ago
Brooks' take is worth considering: https://rodneybrooks.com/the-seven-deadly-sins-of-predicting-the-future-of-ai/ https://rodneybrooks.com/the-seven-deadly-sins-of-predicting... Musk knows nothing substantial about AI except what he's read in SF. Not a great resume for a Cassandra.
otakucode 9y ago
I used to think AGI was a long-way off myself. Until I saw this video: https://youtu.be/Aj-zNjff7wY?t=1621 https://youtu.be/Aj-zNjff7wY?t=1621 He's not just simulating a neural network, which is useless if you want to create an actual mind. He's involving the body. He's actually got the recipe for the approach to AGI that has, in my opinion, by far the best chance of succeeding. I have only an amateur-interest level knowledge of neuroscience research, but even I know that the body isn't just contained in your skull. Its neurons spread throughout your body. And dualism is flatly wrong. There is no body/mind separation. They are the same thing. Changes to the body are reflected by changes in the mind. People who experience total facial paralysis, for one random example, lose the ability to express emotion. And then lose the ability to feel it. And then lose the ability to even remember the subjective sensation of feeling it. It changes their person on the most fundamental level. How are you going to get that from a neural net with zero inputs based upon the biofeedback mechanisms of our meat-based body? You won't. If you get anything conscious at all, it would end up being profoundly different from a human mind. Give it a body, however, and enable the biofeedback even virtually... then you're talking.

GeorgeTirebiter 9y ago

Brooks' take is worth considering: https://rodneybrooks.com/the-seven-deadly-sins-of-predicting-the-future-of-ai/ https://rodneybrooks.com/the-seven-deadly-sins-of-predicting... Musk knows nothing substantial about AI except what he's read in SF. Not a great resume for a Cassandra.

otakucode 9y ago

I used to think AGI was a long-way off myself. Until I saw this video: https://youtu.be/Aj-zNjff7wY?t=1621 https://youtu.be/Aj-zNjff7wY?t=1621 He's not just simulating a neural network, which is useless if you want to create an actual mind. He's involving the body. He's actually got the recipe for the approach to AGI that has, in my opinion, by far the best chance of succeeding. I have only an amateur-interest level knowledge of neuroscience research, but even I know that the body isn't just contained in your skull. Its neurons spread throughout your body. And dualism is flatly wrong. There is no body/mind separation. They are the same thing. Changes to the body are reflected by changes in the mind. People who experience total facial paralysis, for one random example, lose the ability to express emotion. And then lose the ability to feel it. And then lose the ability to even remember the subjective sensation of feeling it. It changes their person on the most fundamental level. How are you going to get that from a neural net with zero inputs based upon the biofeedback mechanisms of our meat-based body? You won't. If you get anything conscious at all, it would end up being profoundly different from a human mind. Give it a body, however, and enable the biofeedback even virtually... then you're talking.