> Brute forcing is the basis of evolution. The goal function of animal intelligence is very different from the goal function of model training. > The algorith

> Brute forcing is the basis of evolution. The goal function of animal intelligence is very different from the goal function of model training. > The algorithm running inside the head of the mouse is the survivor of a million iterative generations as the species brute-forced the entire "get to the food" survival problem. That’s my entire point. There are problems beyond “get the food.” Said differently, the fact that computers aren’t good at “get the food” is not a strong criticism of computers. It just means their goal functions are different. I didn’t say computers are “better,” just that they have a fundamentally different approach to problem solving that may end up being better. It will probably end up being complimentary! This isn’t either or; AI is a tool built by humans to expand their own capabilities. > I encourage those touting computers as something new to comprehend the concept of deep time, that no matter how many of times you run simulations, the natural world has almost certainly run more. And yet no animal figures out how to evolve wheels to move faster. The entire point I’m making is that, sure it’s hard to make computers do certain things (like walk on two legs), but there are plenty of different avenues to achieve things. I encourage evolution maximalists to think a lot more about how engineered and complex the world around them is.