3 ms·
> Look at the time frame from the invention of the transistor to everyone doing nearly everything online. It's less than the average human lifetime. Look at th
by evgen 9y ago
> Look at the time frame from the invention of the transistor to everyone doing nearly everything online. It's less than the average human lifetime.
Look at the time frame from from the invention of controlled heavier-than-air flight to landing a man on the moon; within a human lifetime and before you were born.
Look at the time frame from the point when the vast majority of the human population lived their entire life within a 50 mile radius of where they were born and when fast transportation and global travel exponentially increased the genetic mixing of humanity; within a human lifetime and before our grandparents were born.
Look at the time frame from the point when information could travel no faster than the speed of a good horse to the time when information could travel across the ocean in the time it took you to saddle a horse; within a human lifetime and almost two centuries ago.
Our progress in the last century is significant, but you over-estimate its importance because you are surrounded by it and have little understanding of the history of technology. Things that may seem trivial or even primitive to you were far more important and world-changing inventions, while a lot of what we currently consider significant advances are only important because, for example, we lived in a time when people played finite games better than machines and were around to see that era end.
- naasking 9y agoThose are all examples of super-linear progress, so I'm not sure what point you think you've made. > Things that may seem trivial or even primitive to you were far more important and world-changing inventions Which has zero bearing on the point I was making, which is that super-linear progress in information technology is all around us. Information tech is all that matters to the question of general AI. Like I said, you're missing the forest for the trees.
- goatlover 9y agoThat's only true if the information technology is leading up to AGI, and not say, augmenting human intelligence instead. One could argue that the intelligence explosion has been happening for centuries, but it's human intelligence not machine, that is being amplified.
- naasking 9y ago> One could argue that the intelligence explosion has been happening for centuries, but it's human intelligence not machine, that is being amplified. I agree, humans have been amplifying their own abilities with tech. It's been our biggest competitive advantage. However, at some point information tech will become sophisticated enough to match the capabilities of human brains. At that point, humans will be left behind. The best outcome in this scenario is humans merging with their machines, and that would be a continuation of that same trend. But, it's not the only plausible outcome, and that's what's troubling.
- renox 9y ago> Look at the time frame from the point when information could travel no faster than the speed of a good horse Incorrect example: semaphore relays existed already, but yes transoceanic communications happened very fast indeed.