3 ms·
This is losing the plot when it claims that a motorcycle somehow improves on a cheetah. Sure it goes faster, but it can't self-repair, procreate, needs a boatl
by chmod775 3y ago
This is losing the plot when it claims that a motorcycle somehow improves on a cheetah.
Sure it goes faster, but it can't self-repair, procreate, needs a boatload of supporting infrastructure, is not even remotely as energy-efficient, can't hunt, can't think, the list goes on. If a motorcycle somehow started driving around on its own, it would be completely fucked as soon as humans didn't maintain that supporting infrastructure, stopped feeding it gasoline, or didn't service it. The cheetah has no such problem. Compared to a cheetah, a motorcycle is pathetic in so many ways. We can't even "build" a cheetah. Pretending we can make something better is nonsense.
It may be very well the case that intelligences made from silicon will always be beaten by organic intelligences on self-sufficiency - simple because organics are the way to build such "machines". Any intelligence that is overly reliant on maintenance by organics is ultimately too much at our mercy to be a danger. Just like a fire they may be dangerous, but will ultimately die out without support and constant intervention.
Even when we humans want to keep some complex electronic system running, without fail something goes wrong eventually and the thing goes tits up. Most electronic systems can't go a year without a human directly maintaining them - not even counting all the humans indirectly involved in keeping them running. Meanwhile most organics keep running decades just by themselves. Silicon sucks.
- dist-epoch 3y ago> The cheetah has no such problem So why are cheetahs "On the Brink of Extinction, Again"? https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/cheetahs-brink-extinction-again/ https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/cheetahs-b...
- Tostino 3y agoHumans?
- steve_adams_86 3y agoMassive reduction of prey and habitat, and being hunted. This would kill any species, including humans. Though, apparently they also have low reproductive success. Perhaps if they had habitat and weren’t exterminated for centuries they could have overcome that, though.
- rowanG077 3y agoIt didn't say it improves on the cheetah. It said it is faster then a cheetah. That's not the same thing.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- visarga 3y ago> Sure it goes faster, but it can't self repair, procreate, needs a boatload of supporting infrastructure, is not even remotely as energy efficient, can't hunt, can't think, the list goes on. That's one reason the "stochastic parrots" metaphor is silly. AI's cant make AI's, maybe only in software, but not the hardware. Parrots can make parrots without human assistance, they don't need humans for anything.
- elcomet 3y agoThis metaphor is about repeating without understanding, like parrots do. It is not about the biological aspect of parrots.
- bbor 3y agoThe human mind is nothing but software. I’d definitely be interested in hearing a convincing argument that computer software couldn’t run self-replicating machines. One very convincing point to me: computers are already made by machines, just with a modicum of human involvement.
- chmod775 3y ago>computers are already made by machines, just with a modicum of human involvement. Then they'd be cheap as you'd essentially just be paying for the materials. In reality the process from design to manufacturing involves an absolutely staggering amount of people.
- visarga 3y ago> computers are already made by machines, just with a modicum of human involvement. Then it's simple, we just order some machines and then we don't have to work so much. /s