4 ms·
The vast majority of information cannot be compressed and the proof of this is trivial by a simple counting argument. In any case, it is still just a lookup ta
by ethanwillis 4y ago
The vast majority of information cannot be compressed and the proof of this is trivial by a simple counting argument.
In any case, it is still just a lookup table. Compression, unless lossy, doesn't change the meaning of the information in this lookup table. It just makes access more indirect.
Hutter might think that intelligence is a form of compression, but I think that's just wishful thinking. It might be my ego speaking to say I think I'm the one that's right. But it's not my ego speaking to say that there's no hard proof to say unequivocally that intelligence is equivalent to compression.
- naasking 4y ago> The vast majority of information cannot be compressed and the proof of this is trivial by a simple counting argument It doesn't have to be lossless compression. Intelligence is also about being discerning about the information that's relevant, although that's basically the same point. > But it's not my ego speaking to say that there's no hard proof to say unequivocally that intelligence is equivalent to compression. Actually I think it's kind of trivial to see that intelligence is a necessarily form of compression. Abstractions, concepts, theories, these are all lossy descriptions that discards irrelevant details and capture only relevant details to make problem solving via deduction, induction or abduction tractable. And yet, using those concepts, theories, abstractions you can reproduce/predict observations with very high fidelity. That's compression. Do you have a counterexample of something that we consider intelligence that doesn't fit this model? I suppose it depends what specifically you mean by "equivalent".