4 ms·

> and was lazily side-stepping that argument. Point. Corporations and machine AIs have different constraints on them. Machine AIs have a surplus in learning ti

> and was lazily side-stepping that argument. Point. Corporations and machine AIs have different constraints on them. Machine AIs have a surplus in learning time and processing resources, this let's them develop complex and effective behaviors by brute force. Self awareness is an effective bootstrapping mechanism for such behaviors and companies have managed to take advantage of it. I don't think AIs will see the same returns. Self-awareness isn't a magical infinite returns machine, it only allows humans to bootstrap so much. I'd assume the same of corporations and AIs. I think corporations are actually highly processing and learning constrained bc their processes happen at the speed of communication, so self awareness buys them a lot, but "traditional AI" has gotten where it is by intellectual brute force, at best a self aware AI might be able to get to the same place cheaper than a more performant non-selfnaware one, but probably not faster. I think we will be able to get more out of less hardware, but self-awareness bottlenecks on experience (that's a reality engagement loop not recorded data) which gets expensive to give a machine quickly at scale unless you instantly nominate it the god machine while it still is floundering around.

zmgsabst 4y ago
AI models scale better than wetware models for large, dynamic systems — particularly for complexity above what one person can handle. AI solves the “frozen middle” problem, where senior leadership get unreliable information and can’t visualize the whole business on one side while managers follow their own interests rather than common good on the other. That’s what’s driving cyberization: trying to bring the nervous system of the corporation under control of the central intelligence. And the first corporation to develop an AI which can embody the whole corporation, solving that problem, will massively outcompete its peers. The “frozen middle” is the current limiting factor on organizations ranging from the military to Amazon.
- blamestross 4y ago
  > AI models scale better than wetware models for large, dynamic systems — particularly for complexity above what one person can handle. Totally, but I would argue that benefit is due to a lack of consciousness/self-awareness bottlenecking the process. It's a savant. The best consciousness could do to help is aim such machines at better optimization criteria more effectively than us.
  - zmgsabst 4y ago
    > Totally, but I would argue that benefit is due to a lack of consciousness/self-awareness bottlenecking the process. I don’t think that’s true: for a given tick rate of your consciousness, AI will have a broader comprehension than a human because computers are better at synchronizing and distributing information. Further, that’s the wrong way to think about it: An AI that can only have one thought per minute would dominate any human executive team — because that once per minute thought would truly comprehend the situation of the company and take action that’s consistent with its intent across the company. That ability to accumulate information and then coordinate response is what makes the computers better than humans as corporate executives — and that doesn’t go away just because it becomes self-aware.
    - blamestross 4y ago
      > and that doesn’t go away just because it becomes self-aware. So funny that, biology offers correlation to the contrary. Animals we think are "less conscious" tend to actually have many better cognitive abilities than us. Chimps have faster reaction times and better memory. Octopi have much better spatial and visual reasoning. Consciousness makes us dumber in exchange for more adaptability. If it was a free lunch, biology would be handing it out like candy.
      - zmgsabst 4y ago
        That’s not true, you’re injecting your own biases. Eg, crows have better eyesight and higher intelligence than many monkeys. There’s a reason related to brain synchronization that you typically operate slower — that part is true. But AI already synchronize data and calculate with cascades; so that won’t change. Further, you didn’t actually answer my point: even if AI clocks down significantly in that process, the increase in bandwidth is a trade off that benefits businesses over the other species. For the same reason that humans are the dominant hunters.

zmgsabst 4y ago

AI models scale better than wetware models for large, dynamic systems — particularly for complexity above what one person can handle. AI solves the “frozen middle” problem, where senior leadership get unreliable information and can’t visualize the whole business on one side while managers follow their own interests rather than common good on the other. That’s what’s driving cyberization: trying to bring the nervous system of the corporation under control of the central intelligence. And the first corporation to develop an AI which can embody the whole corporation, solving that problem, will massively outcompete its peers. The “frozen middle” is the current limiting factor on organizations ranging from the military to Amazon.

blamestross 4y ago
> AI models scale better than wetware models for large, dynamic systems — particularly for complexity above what one person can handle. Totally, but I would argue that benefit is due to a lack of consciousness/self-awareness bottlenecking the process. It's a savant. The best consciousness could do to help is aim such machines at better optimization criteria more effectively than us.
- zmgsabst 4y ago
  > Totally, but I would argue that benefit is due to a lack of consciousness/self-awareness bottlenecking the process. I don’t think that’s true: for a given tick rate of your consciousness, AI will have a broader comprehension than a human because computers are better at synchronizing and distributing information. Further, that’s the wrong way to think about it: An AI that can only have one thought per minute would dominate any human executive team — because that once per minute thought would truly comprehend the situation of the company and take action that’s consistent with its intent across the company. That ability to accumulate information and then coordinate response is what makes the computers better than humans as corporate executives — and that doesn’t go away just because it becomes self-aware.
  - blamestross 4y ago
    > and that doesn’t go away just because it becomes self-aware. So funny that, biology offers correlation to the contrary. Animals we think are "less conscious" tend to actually have many better cognitive abilities than us. Chimps have faster reaction times and better memory. Octopi have much better spatial and visual reasoning. Consciousness makes us dumber in exchange for more adaptability. If it was a free lunch, biology would be handing it out like candy.
    - zmgsabst 4y ago
      That’s not true, you’re injecting your own biases. Eg, crows have better eyesight and higher intelligence than many monkeys. There’s a reason related to brain synchronization that you typically operate slower — that part is true. But AI already synchronize data and calculate with cascades; so that won’t change. Further, you didn’t actually answer my point: even if AI clocks down significantly in that process, the increase in bandwidth is a trade off that benefits businesses over the other species. For the same reason that humans are the dominant hunters.