4 ms·

What's the difference between a superintelligence and God?

liabilityprot 4y ago
Liability protection. Superintelligence didn't create Heaven, a world of no suffering, first. Superintelligence did not design biological genetics: including inquest. Aren't there multiple Superintelligences, and how do they meta-analytically agree to disagree? Superintelligence might accountably cryptographically sign its communications or orders; e.g. with W3C Verified Claims and W3C PROV (so that we might ascertain that Superintelligence did indeed themself say or do things)
- liabilityprot 4y ago
  Superintelligence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superintelligence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superintelligence Critical thinking: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking Transhumanism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism Meta-analysis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta-analysis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta-analysis Systematic review: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systematic_review https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systematic_review Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) > Applications: Medicine, Education, Meta-science, Public Policy; #EvidenceBasedPolicy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence-based_practice#Applications https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence-based_practice#Applic... : > The goal of evidence-based practice is to eliminate unsound or outdated practices in favor of more-effective ones by shifting the basis for decision making from tradition, intuition, and unsystematic experience to firmly grounded scientific research.[3]
- boringuser2 4y ago
  > Aren't there multiple Superintelligences, and how do they meta-analytically agree to disagree? This doesn't necessarily follow. In fact, it brings up the question of what even makes an entity distinct at all from its substrate, which is philosophical. Anyhow, "disagreement" as a concept seems to result logically from a divergence of goals or capability to model reality. As such, I suspect that it is a uniquely human (or limited agent, an agent that can't recursively self-improve and an agent that desires aggregation of resources) mode of cognition. >Superintelligence might accountably cryptographically sign its communications or orders; e.g. with W3C Verified Claims and W3C PROV (so that we might ascertain that Superintelligence did indeed themself say or do things) I don't know how to comment on this beyond thinking it kind of misses the point. You don't really need to spin your wheels worrying about how a superintellect would be "accountable" when your ability to model reality would be essentially worthless.
  - liabilityprot 4y ago
    Theory of Mind develops along with ideas about dependence, independence, and interdependence. Humans tend to disagree according to strength of evidence given an epistemological fact-findimg process like "beyond a shadow of a doubt" or "reject the hypothesis due to insufficient structural power"; we disagree about sources, methods, motives, and intent. No, if one says they are "Superintelligence" and they've solved it, they have a job for you; what should one do?
    - boringuser2 4y ago
      You seem to trend slightly too much towards incoherence for my taste.
- liabilityprot 4y ago
  Superintelligence does not provide Healthcare in Heaven only, or Childcare on Earth only by design.
- liabilityprot 4y ago
  Superintelligence did not design a system where suffering babies are taken from their crying mothers and provided for only in Heaven. Superintendence does not make designed dead persons watch from Heaven. Superintelligence does not delete knowledge of their family and Earth in taking them to a better place by design. (For if there is knowledge of earth in heaven, and they cannot assist (by design), there is also suffering in heaven)
ftxbro 4y ago
Can you not wrap your head around the possibility of something that is smarter than any human, but is also not at the level of some kind of omniscient omnipotent being?
- boringuser2 4y ago
  1. My point is that YOU can't. The idea that a human can perfectly measure ability that far surpasses their own and compare if to other abilities that far surpass their own makes no sense. 2. A recursively self-improving AI would appear omniscient or omnipotent in a very short period of time. A recursively self-improving AI converting the solar system into compute for further recursive self-improvement would be unfathomable. 3. You're operating from an anthropic lens. Your conception of a superintelligence is a machine with an intellect that is slightly smarter than the smartest human. A machine with an IQ of 1000 would be God. We have no ability to conceptualize a machine with an IQ of 1,000,000.

Liability protection. Superintelligence didn't create Heaven, a world of no suffering, first. Superintelligence did not design biological genetics: including inquest. Aren't there multiple Superintelligences, and how do they meta-analytically agree to disagree? Superintelligence might accountably cryptographically sign its communications or orders; e.g. with W3C Verified Claims and W3C PROV (so that we might ascertain that Superintelligence did indeed themself say or do things)

liabilityprot 4y ago
Superintelligence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superintelligence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superintelligence Critical thinking: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_thinking Transhumanism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transhumanism Meta-analysis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta-analysis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta-analysis Systematic review: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systematic_review https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systematic_review Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) > Applications: Medicine, Education, Meta-science, Public Policy; #EvidenceBasedPolicy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence-based_practice#Applications https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence-based_practice#Applic... : > The goal of evidence-based practice is to eliminate unsound or outdated practices in favor of more-effective ones by shifting the basis for decision making from tradition, intuition, and unsystematic experience to firmly grounded scientific research.[3]
boringuser2 4y ago
> Aren't there multiple Superintelligences, and how do they meta-analytically agree to disagree? This doesn't necessarily follow. In fact, it brings up the question of what even makes an entity distinct at all from its substrate, which is philosophical. Anyhow, "disagreement" as a concept seems to result logically from a divergence of goals or capability to model reality. As such, I suspect that it is a uniquely human (or limited agent, an agent that can't recursively self-improve and an agent that desires aggregation of resources) mode of cognition. >Superintelligence might accountably cryptographically sign its communications or orders; e.g. with W3C Verified Claims and W3C PROV (so that we might ascertain that Superintelligence did indeed themself say or do things) I don't know how to comment on this beyond thinking it kind of misses the point. You don't really need to spin your wheels worrying about how a superintellect would be "accountable" when your ability to model reality would be essentially worthless.
- liabilityprot 4y ago
  Theory of Mind develops along with ideas about dependence, independence, and interdependence. Humans tend to disagree according to strength of evidence given an epistemological fact-findimg process like "beyond a shadow of a doubt" or "reject the hypothesis due to insufficient structural power"; we disagree about sources, methods, motives, and intent. No, if one says they are "Superintelligence" and they've solved it, they have a job for you; what should one do?
  - boringuser2 4y ago
    You seem to trend slightly too much towards incoherence for my taste.
liabilityprot 4y ago
Superintelligence does not provide Healthcare in Heaven only, or Childcare on Earth only by design.
liabilityprot 4y ago
Superintelligence did not design a system where suffering babies are taken from their crying mothers and provided for only in Heaven. Superintendence does not make designed dead persons watch from Heaven. Superintelligence does not delete knowledge of their family and Earth in taking them to a better place by design. (For if there is knowledge of earth in heaven, and they cannot assist (by design), there is also suffering in heaven)

ftxbro 4y ago

Can you not wrap your head around the possibility of something that is smarter than any human, but is also not at the level of some kind of omniscient omnipotent being?

boringuser2 4y ago
1. My point is that YOU can't. The idea that a human can perfectly measure ability that far surpasses their own and compare if to other abilities that far surpass their own makes no sense. 2. A recursively self-improving AI would appear omniscient or omnipotent in a very short period of time. A recursively self-improving AI converting the solar system into compute for further recursive self-improvement would be unfathomable. 3. You're operating from an anthropic lens. Your conception of a superintelligence is a machine with an intellect that is slightly smarter than the smartest human. A machine with an IQ of 1000 would be God. We have no ability to conceptualize a machine with an IQ of 1,000,000.