3 ms·
It's not absurd to believe that humans will never be able to invent machines that match human level intelligence. Firstly, it's not necessarily logical to assum
by spuz 9y ago
It's not absurd to believe that humans will never be able to invent machines that match human level intelligence. Firstly, it's not necessarily logical to assume that brains are simply computers because we've never created or even imagined a computer that works anything like a brain. Even if it's possible, it might be beyond human intelligence to invent such a computer.
I like to think of AGI like the Warp Drive. It might well be possible, but we might never develop the capability to make one.
- naasking 9y ago> It's not absurd to believe that humans will never be able to invent machines that match human level intelligence It actually is absurd and it's easy to see why: nature evolved a series of progressively more intelligent biochemical computers by accident, simply by trial and error. If that's all we ever did with computers, like enumerating all Turing machines, we would eventually find one more intelligent than us. The fact that we can do even better than simple trial and error, for instance, by building machines that help us build machines, we drastically accelerate that inevitability.
- spuz 9y agoYou are still making the assumption that the brain is a computer. Is there any theoretical proof that our brains are a permutation of a Turing machine? That to me would seem to be the first step towards your conclusion.
- naasking 9y agoThe Bekenstein bound requires any finite volume to contain a finite amount of information, otherwise it would collapse into a black hole. Therefore our brains are, at best, finite state automata, and not even Turing complete.
- jessaustin 9y agoWat? Have you just proven that computers don't exist? I'm suffering a bit of cognitive dissonance here...