4 ms·

I also hate I absurd this argument is, we already have a GI, it's you, it's me, it's the exponentially growing humanity that we all live around and contribute t

I also hate I absurd this argument is, we already have a GI, it's you, it's me, it's the exponentially growing humanity that we all live around and contribute to every single day. Why are we so scared of an artificial brain when we have millions of living brains doing exactly what we are scared the artificial brains are going to do. We are growing exponentially, and it almost all certainty these AGI, if they even become a worthwhile thing compared to non-general AI, are probably going to be human, but incredibly similar and it probably won't go exponentially out of control. This idea that a computer could infinitely improve itself while sitting inside of a boxes absurd, do you know what would happen if you put a human thinker inside of a box for say 2 billion years for them to make theories and think about stuff? They eventually go mad and come out with some of the craziest theories in the world because they don't know what they're talking about because in order to learn you have to experiment and work with the world, not just sit in a box and make up theories. Artificial intelligence is going to have the exact same access to resources and information as humanity does, if not less because there's only going to be a couple of AGI and was going to be billions of humans, and humans are out there reproducing like mad still, well a artificial intelligence needs to build itself for relatively rare and hard to source materials. And if it was easy to self-improve and artificial intelligence, we would have figured it out, we'd be artificially improving ourselves by now, but we haven't, because it's not that easy, and for the most part we are probably limited by the laws of physics People worry so much about HI because they assume Moore's law is just going to continue forever, and soon we're going to have the universe on a chip, but anyone saying that I don't think realizes what exponential growth typically ends in, and that is a plateau. I'll tell you what's going to happen with this. We're going to create AGI, and they're going to be different from us, they're going to be different from us in radical ways, but they're still going to have their own form of emotions, goals, desires, influences, and so on. All of this fear is only going to cause us to delay and obstruct the eventual future where we adjust our own ideals of what is moral, what is good, to create a society that can incorporate these radically new beings. These people are shooting ourselves in the foot, delaying the creation of a better society, on the basis of a fear that has no real basis.

concordDance 4y ago
> And if it was easy to self-improve and artificial intelligence, we would have figured it out, we'd be artificially improving ourselves by now, but we haven't, because it's not that easy, and for the most part we are probably limited by the laws of physics There are three big things that stand in the way of human improvement that do not for AI. The first is reproducibility, you can't make a few copies of a starting state of a human and run them with different parameters to observe the results. The second is ethics, you can't try out a bunch of genetic tweaks on babies because one might have bad side effects. The third is observability. People complain about how much of a black box modern AIs are but you can still see it working and figure out what layers do what. > We're going to create AGI, and they're going to be different from us, they're going to be different from us in radical ways, but they're still going to have their own form of emotions, goals, desires, influences, and so on. I am surprised this reassures you. A race of humans that have perfect memory and can copy themselves would be a terrifying thing.
- bioemerl 4y ago
  All those traits of humans are advantages and disadvantages. Have you ever heard of the concept that science processes when experts die? Churn and recreation breed innovation and copy stamping the smartest people since the 1800s would not have benefited us that greatly. Bad ethics breeds bad science. To recklessly experiment with things we don't understand the consequences of almost always ends badly. We have processes for things like this and those processes generally do not get in the way of process. Also, it's unlikely our ethics will allow AI to do anything we do not. If they can, they're already out of control. > The third is observability. People complain about how much of a black box modern AIs are Self improving AGI will be just as much if not more of a black box than current ones or humans. You can see what's there, but you can do what with humans as well. The problem is the complexity, not observability. The complexity and physical nature of the human brain lets us do a lot with very little. Our brain uses what, 100 watts? It's more advanced than all modern AI at a tiny tiny tiny fraction of the power. And Moore's law is slowing down. Chips are getting bigger. Power consumption going up. Our chips will eventually go the direction of our brains. They will be larger, more specialized, more dynamic. A race of humans with incredible traits would be an astounding addition to our society and the livelihoods of everyone in it. This future does not scare me at all, should it ever happen.

concordDance 4y ago

> And if it was easy to self-improve and artificial intelligence, we would have figured it out, we'd be artificially improving ourselves by now, but we haven't, because it's not that easy, and for the most part we are probably limited by the laws of physics There are three big things that stand in the way of human improvement that do not for AI. The first is reproducibility, you can't make a few copies of a starting state of a human and run them with different parameters to observe the results. The second is ethics, you can't try out a bunch of genetic tweaks on babies because one might have bad side effects. The third is observability. People complain about how much of a black box modern AIs are but you can still see it working and figure out what layers do what. > We're going to create AGI, and they're going to be different from us, they're going to be different from us in radical ways, but they're still going to have their own form of emotions, goals, desires, influences, and so on. I am surprised this reassures you. A race of humans that have perfect memory and can copy themselves would be a terrifying thing.

bioemerl 4y ago
All those traits of humans are advantages and disadvantages. Have you ever heard of the concept that science processes when experts die? Churn and recreation breed innovation and copy stamping the smartest people since the 1800s would not have benefited us that greatly. Bad ethics breeds bad science. To recklessly experiment with things we don't understand the consequences of almost always ends badly. We have processes for things like this and those processes generally do not get in the way of process. Also, it's unlikely our ethics will allow AI to do anything we do not. If they can, they're already out of control. > The third is observability. People complain about how much of a black box modern AIs are Self improving AGI will be just as much if not more of a black box than current ones or humans. You can see what's there, but you can do what with humans as well. The problem is the complexity, not observability. The complexity and physical nature of the human brain lets us do a lot with very little. Our brain uses what, 100 watts? It's more advanced than all modern AI at a tiny tiny tiny fraction of the power. And Moore's law is slowing down. Chips are getting bigger. Power consumption going up. Our chips will eventually go the direction of our brains. They will be larger, more specialized, more dynamic. A race of humans with incredible traits would be an astounding addition to our society and the livelihoods of everyone in it. This future does not scare me at all, should it ever happen.