3 ms·

I think this is the important point. Large corporations and governments can be considered AI already, with entire humans as the neural nodes, augmented by sili

I think this is the important point. Large corporations and governments can be considered AI already, with entire humans as the neural nodes, augmented by silicon co-processors. (I like to point out that Turing was observing his own mind when he created computers, so essentially they have always been reified mechanized thought. Computers are AI already. Ergo, what we think of as AI is really the attempt to make one kind of human thought imitate all the others. From that POV it's kind of foolish, almost a fetish.) I don't have any solutions, I just want to point out that rogue AIs are already a thing from a certain POV. What are the FAANG but a bunch of complex entities that are too large for anyone to fully control or understand? The high-frequency trading nexus is another point of dynamics where human motivation and automatic systems form a system of feedback loops beyond understanding or control. Because humans are part of these machines they cannot be considered inanimate, they are living, breathing systems: cyborgs.

FartyMcFarter 6y ago
> Ergo, what we think of as AI is really the attempt to make one kind of human thought imitate all the others. From that POV it's kind of foolish, almost a fetish.) That is a very interesting way to think about it! However I disagree that it is foolish, simply because there's at least some amount of belief on the part of scientists that computers can simulate physics to any arbitrary degree of precision. If this is the case, then it follows that computers can imitate all of human thought (not just one kind of it), since humans are physical beings.
- carapace 6y ago
  Well, it seems foolish to me to argue over whether something a computer does "really is" AI if they have been AI the whole time. Really, we're arguing about how the logical/rational part of the brain can emulate the other capabilities of the brain, which seems less interesting than the more general question of how to build any machine that can do that. Consider BEAM robotics: > BEAM robotics (from biology, electronics, aesthetics and mechanics) is a style of robotics that primarily uses simple analogue circuits, such as comparators, instead of a microprocessor in order to produce an unusually simple design. While not as flexible as microprocessor based robotics, BEAM robotics can be robust and efficient in performing the task for which it was designed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BEAM_robotics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BEAM_robotics > ...computers can imitate all of human thought (not just one kind of it), since humans are physical beings. Leaving aside the metaphysical questions it raises, we may well be able to build virtual humans someday by emulation of physics of the biology of the neurology of the psychology of people. It just might not be the most efficient way to do it, eh?

FartyMcFarter 6y ago

> Ergo, what we think of as AI is really the attempt to make one kind of human thought imitate all the others. From that POV it's kind of foolish, almost a fetish.) That is a very interesting way to think about it! However I disagree that it is foolish, simply because there's at least some amount of belief on the part of scientists that computers can simulate physics to any arbitrary degree of precision. If this is the case, then it follows that computers can imitate all of human thought (not just one kind of it), since humans are physical beings.

carapace 6y ago
Well, it seems foolish to me to argue over whether something a computer does "really is" AI if they have been AI the whole time. Really, we're arguing about how the logical/rational part of the brain can emulate the other capabilities of the brain, which seems less interesting than the more general question of how to build any machine that can do that. Consider BEAM robotics: > BEAM robotics (from biology, electronics, aesthetics and mechanics) is a style of robotics that primarily uses simple analogue circuits, such as comparators, instead of a microprocessor in order to produce an unusually simple design. While not as flexible as microprocessor based robotics, BEAM robotics can be robust and efficient in performing the task for which it was designed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BEAM_robotics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BEAM_robotics > ...computers can imitate all of human thought (not just one kind of it), since humans are physical beings. Leaving aside the metaphysical questions it raises, we may well be able to build virtual humans someday by emulation of physics of the biology of the neurology of the psychology of people. It just might not be the most efficient way to do it, eh?