4 ms·

I agree about moving the goal posts on animal intelligence but we don't have AGI, not even close. And it has nothing to do with human pride or not facing the f

I agree about moving the goal posts on animal intelligence but we don't have AGI, not even close. And it has nothing to do with human pride or not facing the facts. I mean by that same logic you could argue we solved AI when we invented the calculator. Because it's far better at calculating than us.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
tialaramex 7y ago
Of course we aren't close to AGI. Maybe I should be clearer, I expect that such an AI would pass the Turing test more or less inadvertently in the course of other activities. We might even briefly be unaware of it because of this. From its point of view "humiliate humans by being smarter than them" is not a thing, just as I'm sure sparrows don't aim to "humiliate humans by being able to fly unaided". But the moving goal posts are a symptom of the problem that inspired Turing here. The humans will claim they're still the only ones with real intelligence even after they fail that test, but they'll know what they're doing. As we see in this thread, today plenty of people are convinced that they aren't moving the goal posts, even though they are. My suspicion is that the humiliation of the "imitation game" stops that, even as the outward pantomime continues. Humans will keep _saying_ they know they're special but they won't really believe it any more. Good. When a Pope insists they are certain God exists, I know they're lying, whereas when some little old lady in a sleepy rural village insists the same perhaps she really believes. The Pope has seen enough to know he isn't sure, lie to me as he might.