4 ms·

This meat bag is made from star dust, self-assembling from a single microscopic machine, into a form so complex that it's complexity, adaptability and computing

This meat bag is made from star dust, self-assembling from a single microscopic machine, into a form so complex that it's complexity, adaptability and computing power dwarves by several orders of magnitude all the machines and computers we have built or will build in the foreseeable future, combined. And billions of them exist, doing things like inventing imaginary worlds, loving each others, gardening and playing soccer. And they work only with a bit of water and food. We'll get some sort of usable artificial intelligence (meaning robot slaves and autonomous rovers) at some point, but I think it's a mistake to underestimate human intelligence.

rantwasp 6y ago
it depends. in the next 10 years, no. next 100 years, probably no. but if you have thousands or millions of years ahead I think artificial intelligence is going to become a thing. also we'll drop the artificial and call it what it is going to be: intelligence.
koheripbal 6y ago
This is not a logical comment. Everything is made of stardust - including the androids we'd construct. ...and while "complexity" is one word for our DNA - another more accurate term would be "complete fucking mess of code". It breaks frequently, is nearly impossible to model and predict, and can only be modified with agonizing inaccurate testing. Your only reasonable argument here is that computing power isn't up to snuff. That's true - but that argument is rapidly dwindling.
- virgilp 6y ago
  > another more accurate term would be "complete fucking mess of code" That just tells me you didn't write it, but I guess I already suspected that.
- Valgrim 6y ago
  Maybe it seems like a "complete fucking mess of code" because it's not code at all! See https://phys.org/news/2020-04-dna-life-bookjust-jumbled-ingredients.html https://phys.org/news/2020-04-dna-life-bookjust-jumbled-ingr... Also relevant XKCD https://xkcd.com/1605/ https://xkcd.com/1605/
  - koheripbal 6y ago
    The first link is essentially a description of epigenetics - which I'm not arguing against. It's "part of the mess". The second link is funny, but not an accurate comparison because when decompiled/deobfuscated, the google.com page resolves to well structured code. The human genome does not - there are interdependencies that have no logical purpose - pure happenstance. ...but that's not really my point anyway. My point is simply that it would be easier to build a better system from scratch. It might not be able to self-replicate from a single unit in the wild, but that no longer needs to be a requirement for us as a species.
    - Valgrim 6y ago
      Maybe it would be easier, maybe not. My point is that we don't understand how the brain, intelligence, consciousness and emotions works. We try really hard to, in many different ways, and it's anything but easy. Every time artificial intelligence gets popular, we get the impression that we are on the grasp of understanding it, until we hit a wall. I'm pretty sure the robots we send on other planets or around other stars will be very capable, but I don't think we can just reinvent our humanity from scratch.

rantwasp 6y ago

it depends. in the next 10 years, no. next 100 years, probably no. but if you have thousands or millions of years ahead I think artificial intelligence is going to become a thing. also we'll drop the artificial and call it what it is going to be: intelligence.

koheripbal 6y ago

This is not a logical comment. Everything is made of stardust - including the androids we'd construct. ...and while "complexity" is one word for our DNA - another more accurate term would be "complete fucking mess of code". It breaks frequently, is nearly impossible to model and predict, and can only be modified with agonizing inaccurate testing. Your only reasonable argument here is that computing power isn't up to snuff. That's true - but that argument is rapidly dwindling.

virgilp 6y ago
> another more accurate term would be "complete fucking mess of code" That just tells me you didn't write it, but I guess I already suspected that.
Valgrim 6y ago
Maybe it seems like a "complete fucking mess of code" because it's not code at all! See https://phys.org/news/2020-04-dna-life-bookjust-jumbled-ingredients.html https://phys.org/news/2020-04-dna-life-bookjust-jumbled-ingr... Also relevant XKCD https://xkcd.com/1605/ https://xkcd.com/1605/
- koheripbal 6y ago
  The first link is essentially a description of epigenetics - which I'm not arguing against. It's "part of the mess". The second link is funny, but not an accurate comparison because when decompiled/deobfuscated, the google.com page resolves to well structured code. The human genome does not - there are interdependencies that have no logical purpose - pure happenstance. ...but that's not really my point anyway. My point is simply that it would be easier to build a better system from scratch. It might not be able to self-replicate from a single unit in the wild, but that no longer needs to be a requirement for us as a species.
  - Valgrim 6y ago
    Maybe it would be easier, maybe not. My point is that we don't understand how the brain, intelligence, consciousness and emotions works. We try really hard to, in many different ways, and it's anything but easy. Every time artificial intelligence gets popular, we get the impression that we are on the grasp of understanding it, until we hit a wall. I'm pretty sure the robots we send on other planets or around other stars will be very capable, but I don't think we can just reinvent our humanity from scratch.