3 ms·

We also made lots of fantastic predictions about space travel. I don't buy that hype guarantees future success. I'm not even sure it's relevant beyond possibly

by rapind 9y ago

We also made lots of fantastic predictions about space travel. I don't buy that hype guarantees future success. I'm not even sure it's relevant beyond possibly getting more people working in the domain and the resulting impact that may have.

rpedela 9y ago
True, but some of those space predictions may come true sooner rather later now largely thanks to Elon and SpaceX. For example, a startup called Positron Dynamics has a serious proposal for an antimatter rocket. If it works, that would likely open up the solar system to human exploration. I doubt they would have gotten funding without the renewed excitement around space.
ThomPete 9y ago
In AI it's not hype is trajectory. The fact that computers now can learn they way they do, is a very big deal it simply cannot be emphasized enough. We are only a few years in and haven't seen the limits of where it can be applied yet. It's Moores Law + Metcalfe's law. With space there are all sorts of hard limits because of physics and the goal is very specific. With deep learning there isn't some hard limit because there isn't very specific goals in the same way and not the same kind of laws hindering it. On the subject of space I am much more convinced that AI will be traveling the universe than humans.
- rapind 9y ago
  To have a meaningful discussion I think we need to identify which specific AI we're talking about first. If it's general intelligence then I definitely think the hype is real. I don't think machine intelligence gets us any close to general intelligence than say a calculator has.
  - ThomPete 9y ago
    Sure but I don't think anyone here is talking about general intelligence. You don't need general intelligence to replace a lot of ex. job functions. Ironically some of the lowest paid (cleaning) does require close to GI. But many other areas are quite far and are increasingly replacing human intellect. That is a big deal no matter how you look at it.
    - rapind 9y ago
      Yeah I'm with you on that. There's a lot of grindy jobs that are really just paying humans to behave like robots. I think we're looking at a massive increase in an already large class gap. The fallout is going to be huge and in not immediately obvious ways. I don't think we have the maturity to deal with it. It's a pretty depressing topic TBH. I'm not advocating for anything either. I believe technological advances are inevitable in a global competitive economy.
      - ThomPete 9y ago
        Yes, agree with you. The way I look at it is that it's not even because of the global competition it's simply that technology gives you such a big advantage compared to those that don't use it and thus we are basically improving our own short-term situation for long-term rendering ourselves insignificant. Instead of looking at the last 200 years of industrial history I find it much more telling to look at 200.000 million years of evolution. To take it even further out there. To me it seems like evolution favors the best information carriers which might mean that "silicon" will replace carbon based lifeforms simply because it's a better information carrier than us.
        rapind 9y ago
        Take it further. As a byproduct of chasing AGI we discover there is no soul and that we're just organic (inneficient) robots with previously incalculable inputs. Great news, we can hack oursleves, augment ourselves, you name it. However, meaning eludes us. No one cares, carbon or silicon based. The end.
        yters 9y ago
        It doesn't seem to you that AGI is impossible?
        rapind 9y ago
        It's a coin flip for me at this point. I'm an agnostic I guess. There are people far smarter than I that have embraced religion of some sort, so I don't feel too bad about it. Heads: If all we are is math, then eventually, through smarter and smarter computers, we have a chance of solving it... and it'll probably happen fast once (if) we invent AIG. This will inevitably resolve that free will is an illusion. It's kind of the ultimate atom bomb in a way I suppose, but without maliciousness (and wouldn't you want to know anyways??). Tails: If we're something more than math, a soul or what have you, then we probably can't create pure AIG, at least not without magic. We might create an approximation that uses sufficient inputs to make it almost impossible to tell the difference though. That could be a really useful tool (or weapon...).

by rapind 9y ago

rpedela 9y ago

True, but some of those space predictions may come true sooner rather later now largely thanks to Elon and SpaceX. For example, a startup called Positron Dynamics has a serious proposal for an antimatter rocket. If it works, that would likely open up the solar system to human exploration. I doubt they would have gotten funding without the renewed excitement around space.

ThomPete 9y ago

In AI it's not hype is trajectory. The fact that computers now can learn they way they do, is a very big deal it simply cannot be emphasized enough. We are only a few years in and haven't seen the limits of where it can be applied yet. It's Moores Law + Metcalfe's law. With space there are all sorts of hard limits because of physics and the goal is very specific. With deep learning there isn't some hard limit because there isn't very specific goals in the same way and not the same kind of laws hindering it. On the subject of space I am much more convinced that AI will be traveling the universe than humans.

rapind 9y ago
To have a meaningful discussion I think we need to identify which specific AI we're talking about first. If it's general intelligence then I definitely think the hype is real. I don't think machine intelligence gets us any close to general intelligence than say a calculator has.
- ThomPete 9y ago
  Sure but I don't think anyone here is talking about general intelligence. You don't need general intelligence to replace a lot of ex. job functions. Ironically some of the lowest paid (cleaning) does require close to GI. But many other areas are quite far and are increasingly replacing human intellect. That is a big deal no matter how you look at it.
  - rapind 9y ago
    Yeah I'm with you on that. There's a lot of grindy jobs that are really just paying humans to behave like robots. I think we're looking at a massive increase in an already large class gap. The fallout is going to be huge and in not immediately obvious ways. I don't think we have the maturity to deal with it. It's a pretty depressing topic TBH. I'm not advocating for anything either. I believe technological advances are inevitable in a global competitive economy.
    - ThomPete 9y ago
      Yes, agree with you. The way I look at it is that it's not even because of the global competition it's simply that technology gives you such a big advantage compared to those that don't use it and thus we are basically improving our own short-term situation for long-term rendering ourselves insignificant. Instead of looking at the last 200 years of industrial history I find it much more telling to look at 200.000 million years of evolution. To take it even further out there. To me it seems like evolution favors the best information carriers which might mean that "silicon" will replace carbon based lifeforms simply because it's a better information carrier than us.
      - rapind 9y ago
        Take it further. As a byproduct of chasing AGI we discover there is no soul and that we're just organic (inneficient) robots with previously incalculable inputs. Great news, we can hack oursleves, augment ourselves, you name it. However, meaning eludes us. No one cares, carbon or silicon based. The end.
        yters 9y ago
        It doesn't seem to you that AGI is impossible?
        rapind 9y ago
        It's a coin flip for me at this point. I'm an agnostic I guess. There are people far smarter than I that have embraced religion of some sort, so I don't feel too bad about it. Heads: If all we are is math, then eventually, through smarter and smarter computers, we have a chance of solving it... and it'll probably happen fast once (if) we invent AIG. This will inevitably resolve that free will is an illusion. It's kind of the ultimate atom bomb in a way I suppose, but without maliciousness (and wouldn't you want to know anyways??). Tails: If we're something more than math, a soul or what have you, then we probably can't create pure AIG, at least not without magic. We might create an approximation that uses sufficient inputs to make it almost impossible to tell the difference though. That could be a really useful tool (or weapon...).