4 ms·

I do quantum mechanical simulations for a living, and I really don't see that kind of thing ever working. Luckily I don't think you'd need a full quantum mechan

by hugh3 16y ago

I do quantum mechanical simulations for a living, and I really don't see that kind of thing ever working. Luckily I don't think you'd need a full quantum mechanical simulation to get an artificial brain working anyway. But this raises the next problem: even if I did build myself a copy of my brain (overlooking the ethical issues in doing so), it's still not any damn smarter than I am. And if I can't figure out how to build a smarter brain than mine then it can't figure it out either, so we're still stuck. This is the big hole in the "singularity" scenario -- there's no reason to think that brains are capable of building ever-smarter brains. We don't even know, really, what that would mean. What would a smarter version of my brain look like? Would it be like my brain except capable of juggling more symbols at once? Or would it be like my brain except less likely to jump to dumb conclusions?

berntb 16y ago
>> ... if I can't figure out how to build a smarter brain than mine then it can't figure it out either You mean, just like complex processors are impossible, because you personally couldn't design one, since there are just too many work years in doing that? >>there's no reason to think that brains are capable of building ever-smarter brains. What happens when you let groups of people build sub-systems? And then the groups iterate over those sub-systems? Not to mention hardware speedups? I know enough to be a bit in awe of quantum simulations, so I em a bit shocked to not see a better argument outside your own area of expertise. :-)
arethuza 16y ago
I would hope that as part of the process of creating these simulations we would gain an element of understanding into how our own general intelligence actually works, hopefully then allowing a degree of architectural upgrading to occur (i.e. not just faster but qualitatively better). Once that happens, and assuming that there is a sequence of possible upgrade paths, then I would expect something like a Vingean singularity to occur. Hopefully whatever entity does this will be an Iain M Banks fan and will appreciate that being nice to us slow dull bags of meat could be mutually entertaining.
bermanoid 16y ago
And if I can't figure out how to build a smarter brain than mine then it can't figure it out either, so we're still stuck. For one thing, it's pretty likely that blindly expanding the size of your neocortex would increase your intelligence greatly without any major architectural changes - just pack more neurons in there in roughly the same pattern, or expand the depth of the cortical column (that might be more difficult architecturally, though, I don't think the structure is a homogeneous vertically as it is horizontally). You're right, though, it's not necessarily true that even if we can improve our own design that means that by continuing to improve it we can achieve neverending gains. It is possible that at some point we'll reach a threshold, and we won't be quite smart enough to pass over it to the next level of intelligence. But I think it's rather unlikely that we're close to that barrier - if we can beat our own intelligence at all, we should see a roughly exponential increase for at least a little while.
gnosis 16y ago
"This is the big hole in the "singularity" scenario -- there's no reason to think that brains are capable of building ever-smarter brains." One thing that could be done with simulated brains is save a copy, tinker with it and see what happens. If it doesn't work out, just restart the simulation. This is not so easy to do with biological human brains, but may be quite simple and straightforward with simulated human brains. Of course, there are very serious ethical issues in doing that kind of tinkering and "rebooting" even of simulated brains. But the technological capability to do that will be there should someone decide to (and someone likely will). "We don't even know, really, what that would mean. What would a smarter version of my brain look like?" Does it have to be smarter? How about faster? It may be possible to speed up a brain simulation to the point where it's thinking 10 times faster than humans. Or maybe 100 times faster. Who knows where the limits lie? If you had 10 or 100 lifetimes to think about improving your brain, do you think you might come up with some promising ideas?

by hugh3 16y ago

berntb 16y ago

>> ... if I can't figure out how to build a smarter brain than mine then it can't figure it out either You mean, just like complex processors are impossible, because you personally couldn't design one, since there are just too many work years in doing that? >>there's no reason to think that brains are capable of building ever-smarter brains. What happens when you let groups of people build sub-systems? And then the groups iterate over those sub-systems? Not to mention hardware speedups? I know enough to be a bit in awe of quantum simulations, so I em a bit shocked to not see a better argument outside your own area of expertise. :-)

arethuza 16y ago

I would hope that as part of the process of creating these simulations we would gain an element of understanding into how our own general intelligence actually works, hopefully then allowing a degree of architectural upgrading to occur (i.e. not just faster but qualitatively better). Once that happens, and assuming that there is a sequence of possible upgrade paths, then I would expect something like a Vingean singularity to occur. Hopefully whatever entity does this will be an Iain M Banks fan and will appreciate that being nice to us slow dull bags of meat could be mutually entertaining.

bermanoid 16y ago

And if I can't figure out how to build a smarter brain than mine then it can't figure it out either, so we're still stuck. For one thing, it's pretty likely that blindly expanding the size of your neocortex would increase your intelligence greatly without any major architectural changes - just pack more neurons in there in roughly the same pattern, or expand the depth of the cortical column (that might be more difficult architecturally, though, I don't think the structure is a homogeneous vertically as it is horizontally). You're right, though, it's not necessarily true that even if we can improve our own design that means that by continuing to improve it we can achieve neverending gains. It is possible that at some point we'll reach a threshold, and we won't be quite smart enough to pass over it to the next level of intelligence. But I think it's rather unlikely that we're close to that barrier - if we can beat our own intelligence at all, we should see a roughly exponential increase for at least a little while.

gnosis 16y ago

"This is the big hole in the "singularity" scenario -- there's no reason to think that brains are capable of building ever-smarter brains." One thing that could be done with simulated brains is save a copy, tinker with it and see what happens. If it doesn't work out, just restart the simulation. This is not so easy to do with biological human brains, but may be quite simple and straightforward with simulated human brains. Of course, there are very serious ethical issues in doing that kind of tinkering and "rebooting" even of simulated brains. But the technological capability to do that will be there should someone decide to (and someone likely will). "We don't even know, really, what that would mean. What would a smarter version of my brain look like?" Does it have to be smarter? How about faster? It may be possible to speed up a brain simulation to the point where it's thinking 10 times faster than humans. Or maybe 100 times faster. Who knows where the limits lie? If you had 10 or 100 lifetimes to think about improving your brain, do you think you might come up with some promising ideas?