4 ms·

Yes, he did. But working machines vs thinking machines is still a different ball game. I won't give details of why I believe the way I do (I might someday; I

Yes, he did. But working machines vs thinking machines is still a different ball game. I won't give details of why I believe the way I do (I might someday; I have a blog post draft), but I'm extremely confident that thinking machines will never surpass humans.

fnordpiglet 4y ago
Here’s the thing - John Henry died beating a machine designed only to dig a hole. But JH was capable of almost any task but chose to die to best a machine at one thing. Thinking machines already blow away humans at most single tasks if they’re designed towards that tasks. There are a few that LLM are assaulting that humans are undeniably better at, some more that aren’t currently being assaulted. As some point it will be possible to assemble these single task machines into an ensemble. They will collaborate in human superior ways to accomplish most human tasks in a superior way. But there may still be areas we can’t cover with our machines. More importantly I think for the same reason we don’t build steam drills that also weave cloth we won’t build machines that are better than humans at all things. What’s the point? Other than novelty the only reason I can see to make a machine that’s superior to humans at all things is interplanetary terraforming or other such space operations requiring extreme intelligence and adaptability and capability while surviving a hostile environment. Even then, the act of hardening the complex electronics required might make it easier to just make a nice terrarium for humans. I don’t believe there’s any argument possible that we are prohibited by physics from creating an intelligence like our own. This would imply a few things. There could be no other intelligence like ours, because we are unique - but already we know of many animals with approaching intelligence, we evolved from animals less intelligent, and it would preclude alien intelligence because somehow we are exceptions. Or, intelligence requires some “spark” from the divine - there’s been nothing that provides any evidence of such a thing and as we whittle top down and bottoms up, it appears more likely that while extraordinarily rare, it’s a naturally emergent phenomenon- and if there is a divine spark it’s the spark of life and evolution that leads human level intelligence. Or, there’s some complex process we haven’t understood that leads to human intelligence (quantum, whatever). Even if true it can be understood and replicated, that’s what science does. Even if any one of these is right the last one holds true. The amazing thing about intelligence combined with the process of science is if there is any mechanism by which intelligence arises, it must be observable, and if it’s observable, it can be replicated, and it must be possible to be created by humans.
lanstin 4y ago
A very strong claim. Do you think intelligence from other biological systems could also never surpass human intelligence?
ryanwaggoner 4y ago
Does it relate to your religious beliefs?
- gavinhoward 4y ago
  Yes, but it's also something that I have been thinking about why. I hate not knowing why, even if it's for my religion, so if there is something in my religion that I can't explain, I spend time thinking, dissecting, working (and praying in the case of religious things) until I understand the why. I don't fully understand the why yet, but I do understand a lot of it, enough to be completely confident in this. I'm working on the rest, and once I do understand it, in a scientific sense, I'll write and release the blog post.

fnordpiglet 4y ago

Here’s the thing - John Henry died beating a machine designed only to dig a hole. But JH was capable of almost any task but chose to die to best a machine at one thing. Thinking machines already blow away humans at most single tasks if they’re designed towards that tasks. There are a few that LLM are assaulting that humans are undeniably better at, some more that aren’t currently being assaulted. As some point it will be possible to assemble these single task machines into an ensemble. They will collaborate in human superior ways to accomplish most human tasks in a superior way. But there may still be areas we can’t cover with our machines. More importantly I think for the same reason we don’t build steam drills that also weave cloth we won’t build machines that are better than humans at all things. What’s the point? Other than novelty the only reason I can see to make a machine that’s superior to humans at all things is interplanetary terraforming or other such space operations requiring extreme intelligence and adaptability and capability while surviving a hostile environment. Even then, the act of hardening the complex electronics required might make it easier to just make a nice terrarium for humans. I don’t believe there’s any argument possible that we are prohibited by physics from creating an intelligence like our own. This would imply a few things. There could be no other intelligence like ours, because we are unique - but already we know of many animals with approaching intelligence, we evolved from animals less intelligent, and it would preclude alien intelligence because somehow we are exceptions. Or, intelligence requires some “spark” from the divine - there’s been nothing that provides any evidence of such a thing and as we whittle top down and bottoms up, it appears more likely that while extraordinarily rare, it’s a naturally emergent phenomenon- and if there is a divine spark it’s the spark of life and evolution that leads human level intelligence. Or, there’s some complex process we haven’t understood that leads to human intelligence (quantum, whatever). Even if true it can be understood and replicated, that’s what science does. Even if any one of these is right the last one holds true. The amazing thing about intelligence combined with the process of science is if there is any mechanism by which intelligence arises, it must be observable, and if it’s observable, it can be replicated, and it must be possible to be created by humans.

lanstin 4y ago

A very strong claim. Do you think intelligence from other biological systems could also never surpass human intelligence?

ryanwaggoner 4y ago

Does it relate to your religious beliefs?

gavinhoward 4y ago
Yes, but it's also something that I have been thinking about why. I hate not knowing why, even if it's for my religion, so if there is something in my religion that I can't explain, I spend time thinking, dissecting, working (and praying in the case of religious things) until I understand the why. I don't fully understand the why yet, but I do understand a lot of it, enough to be completely confident in this. I'm working on the rest, and once I do understand it, in a scientific sense, I'll write and release the blog post.