5 ms·
Of course strong AI is possible; most people can make one with 18 years and a willing partner. It just doesn't scale.
by karpierz 5y ago
Of course strong AI is possible; most people can make one with 18 years and a willing partner.
It just doesn't scale.
- spyder 5y agoThat's Natural Intelligence not Artificial Intelligence.
- okaram 5y agoWell ... Artificial means created by humans, right? ;)
- 9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y agoNaturally, but we’re going for artificial humor today.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- gcheong 5y agoAlso very nondeterministic
- 9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y agoIt’s a feature, not a bug.
- 9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y ago> most people can make one with 18 years and a willing partner Well, there’s your scaling problem. It should only take an instant to create a Strong AI (if you believe that Strong AI can be created). What’s Weak about a Strong AI that takes a couple of years to make but pees on the floor all the time?
- harry8 5y ago> It just doesn't scale. On what planet? I can give you about 7 billion reasons why it isn't this one.
- samplatt 5y agoThat's just 7 billion reasons why it can't (or at least, doesn't) scale larger than ~3lbs.
- salawat 5y agoIt doesn't scale in the "I want twice as many, right now, to use, abuse, and discard without guilt or strings attached". 9 women do not a baby in 1 month make. Once you have said bab(y|ies), you then have the inconvenience of them having a will of their own, you have to support and eventually pay them, and dear god, make too many of them and they might even just throw you away instead of going in the direction you want. That kind of not scaling. I mean... If no one else is willing to say it, I'll call a spade a spade; because that is precisely the major draw of the computer as ecpnomic/logistical lubricant. Doing jobs of people, but not getting paid or having to be accounted for as one.
- izzygonzalez 5y agoIf we manage to create an artificial sentience then we need to legislate and protect their rights. AGI won't be a free lunch.
- drdeca 5y agoJust because something is AGI probably needn't imply that it is sapient. It might have no internal experience, no feeling of desire, only a utility function which it optimizes.
- krageon 5y agoThis reasoning is why it will need rights. If it doesn't, people thinking these thoughts (which are impossible to answer, like they are for every other potential sapience. Not just AGI) will abuse that reasoning to create yet another creative modern form of slavery.
- mannykannot 5y agoThat's the last step in a training process that took a half-billion years, if we count from the first neurons (this is not, of course, an argument against the feasibility of strong AI.)
- 9wzYQbTYsAIc 5y agoOne small step for bosons, one giant leap for consciousness.
- Planktonne 5y agoEvery DL system ever made is also the last step in a training process that took half a billion years. It's not reasonable to discount the training of parents/predecessors only when we're talking about machines; they still would not exist without them.
- mannykannot 5y agoThere is a slight ambiguity in 'last', which might mean either 'most recent' or 'final'. The difference here is that while karpierz's last step is, at least for now, the final one in a process producing a strong, generalized, self-awarely-conscious theory-of-mind-holding intelligent agent, the evolution of DL systems has not yet done so.
- auntienomen 5y agoIt can be partly parallelized, by staggering.
- jahewson 5y agoIt’s embarrassingly parallel.