5 ms·

Worth considering these two points. Inteligence is not one dimensional as is evolution => https://backchannel.com/the-myth-of-a-superhuman-ai-59282b686c62 http

Worth considering these two points. Inteligence is not one dimensional as is evolution => https://backchannel.com/the-myth-of-a-superhuman-ai-59282b686c62 https://backchannel.com/the-myth-of-a-superhuman-ai-59282b68... Silicon based intelligent machines might not energy efficient => https://aeon.co/essays/intelligent-machines-might-want-to-become-biological-again https://aeon.co/essays/intelligent-machines-might-want-to-be...

seagreen 8y ago
Why do people keep reposting that first article? I encourage you to reread it with a critical eye. A choice quote: In contradistinction to this orthodoxy, I find the following five heresies to have more evidence to support them. Intelligence is not a single dimension, so “smarter than humans” is a meaningless concept. Humans do not have general purpose minds, and neither will AIs. This is awfully similar to "On the Impossibility of Supersized Machines" (https://arxiv.org/pdf/1703.10987.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/1703.10987.pdf). EDIT: Re: energy efficiency: the problem is that humans are too energy efficient. Your brain can keep functioning after 3 days of running across the Savanna without food, which is (a) awesome, and (b) not really helpful nowadays. The cost of this is that you can only usefully use a little energy each day, say 4 or 5 burgers at most. AGI prototypes will usefully slurp in power measured in number of reactors.
emtel 8y ago
On the first article, if you believe that a human is smarter than a chimp, and a chimp is smarter than a snail, then it raises the question of whether entities smarter than humans are possible. I suppose it might be difficult to precisely define a concept of intelligence that matches our intuition that humans are smarter than chimps, who in turn are smarter than snails. But such difficulty just says something about how facile you are with defining concepts. It doesn't have any bearing on how things play out in the real world. On the second point, who cares? If the first AGI draws gigawatts, it will still be an AGI.

seagreen 8y ago

Why do people keep reposting that first article? I encourage you to reread it with a critical eye. A choice quote: In contradistinction to this orthodoxy, I find the following five heresies to have more evidence to support them. Intelligence is not a single dimension, so “smarter than humans” is a meaningless concept. Humans do not have general purpose minds, and neither will AIs. This is awfully similar to "On the Impossibility of Supersized Machines" (https://arxiv.org/pdf/1703.10987.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/1703.10987.pdf). EDIT: Re: energy efficiency: the problem is that humans are too energy efficient. Your brain can keep functioning after 3 days of running across the Savanna without food, which is (a) awesome, and (b) not really helpful nowadays. The cost of this is that you can only usefully use a little energy each day, say 4 or 5 burgers at most. AGI prototypes will usefully slurp in power measured in number of reactors.

emtel 8y ago

On the first article, if you believe that a human is smarter than a chimp, and a chimp is smarter than a snail, then it raises the question of whether entities smarter than humans are possible. I suppose it might be difficult to precisely define a concept of intelligence that matches our intuition that humans are smarter than chimps, who in turn are smarter than snails. But such difficulty just says something about how facile you are with defining concepts. It doesn't have any bearing on how things play out in the real world. On the second point, who cares? If the first AGI draws gigawatts, it will still be an AGI.