5 ms·

You're missing the point several times over. The entire point is very simple: if there is no magic involved it's down to physics. If it's possible to create bra

You're missing the point several times over. The entire point is very simple: if there is no magic involved it's down to physics. If it's possible to create brains without magic, it is possible to do so artificially.

gooseus 9y ago
I don't think I am... if a task is possible, but takes 100x the lifetime of the universe to accomplish, is it actually "possible"? Or is accomplishing that task the same as "magic"? It I send a message using a one-time pad, the other person knows what I sent, you can ask questions and see that communication is actually happening... so if we're not using magic to communicate, it must be possible to communicate in the same way, right? Yet it's mathmatically impossible to do so without access to hidden information (shared key)... no laws says that you can access that information, even with all the computational ability available in the universe. The mechanisms and communication patterns of consciousness are similar, if it takes till the sun explodes to train a true AGI then aren't we just getting pedantic about what is possible/magic?
- johansch 9y ago
  That doesn't really make much sense to me, I'm afraid. Please bear with me, but my first guess is that you have invented a coping mechanism that allows you to deal with conflicting information in your mind. Are you by any chance religious? (I figure I should be allowed to ask such a normally speaking quite loaded question because of my previous statements, up the thread.)
  - gooseus 9y ago
    No, I am not, by any chance, religious. I don't rule out the possibility of a God or God-like intelligence existing in the Universe, but that's simply as a result of the "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" principle I hold to. I don't really see how religion factors into this though... I feel like I'm talking about a simple concept too. If I show you an encrypted message and show you that other people can read the contents with a key, then ask you to read it without the key, why can't you? It's not magic, it's math.
    - johansch 9y ago
      Well, my apoligies for being presumptuous then.
  - sullyj3 9y ago
    Your first guess? You don't get to dismiss peoples' arguments as superstition just because you don't understand them.
sampo 9y ago
I don't think anyone is saying there won't be human level AI 500+ years into the future. Like you said, it's not against the laws of physics or anything. The question is, will it happen in less than 50-100 years, or would we be like medieval alchemists rushing to outline the first nuclear weapons treaties, right after they have just invented black gunpowder.

gooseus 9y ago

I don't think I am... if a task is possible, but takes 100x the lifetime of the universe to accomplish, is it actually "possible"? Or is accomplishing that task the same as "magic"? It I send a message using a one-time pad, the other person knows what I sent, you can ask questions and see that communication is actually happening... so if we're not using magic to communicate, it must be possible to communicate in the same way, right? Yet it's mathmatically impossible to do so without access to hidden information (shared key)... no laws says that you can access that information, even with all the computational ability available in the universe. The mechanisms and communication patterns of consciousness are similar, if it takes till the sun explodes to train a true AGI then aren't we just getting pedantic about what is possible/magic?

johansch 9y ago
That doesn't really make much sense to me, I'm afraid. Please bear with me, but my first guess is that you have invented a coping mechanism that allows you to deal with conflicting information in your mind. Are you by any chance religious? (I figure I should be allowed to ask such a normally speaking quite loaded question because of my previous statements, up the thread.)
- gooseus 9y ago
  No, I am not, by any chance, religious. I don't rule out the possibility of a God or God-like intelligence existing in the Universe, but that's simply as a result of the "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" principle I hold to. I don't really see how religion factors into this though... I feel like I'm talking about a simple concept too. If I show you an encrypted message and show you that other people can read the contents with a key, then ask you to read it without the key, why can't you? It's not magic, it's math.
  - johansch 9y ago
    Well, my apoligies for being presumptuous then.
- sullyj3 9y ago
  Your first guess? You don't get to dismiss peoples' arguments as superstition just because you don't understand them.

sampo 9y ago

I don't think anyone is saying there won't be human level AI 500+ years into the future. Like you said, it's not against the laws of physics or anything. The question is, will it happen in less than 50-100 years, or would we be like medieval alchemists rushing to outline the first nuclear weapons treaties, right after they have just invented black gunpowder.