4 ms·
This feeds into one of my pet hypotheses about human ability: the most important biological factors determining success lie not in whatever influences IQ or oth
by api 3y ago
This feeds into one of my pet hypotheses about human ability: the most important biological factors determining success lie not in whatever influences IQ or other intelligence or creativity attributes but in the dopamine system.
Take 20 IQ points from someone and replace that with the ability to engage focus and flow state at will and see what happens.
Our dopamine system is tuned for a world that is far slower than this one and largely unchanging. From the perspective of modernity almost all humans exist in a state of catatonic depression. Few humans are able to sustain the level of focus and activity that would be optimal in today's world. When we do, in short bursts, we see amazing results.
Unfortunately drugs like amphetamines have side effects and are addictive. From what I've seen amphetamines and similar focus drugs often lead to a lot of focus and engagement but mis-regulated: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mf3e1F1a0Hg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mf3e1F1a0Hg
An AI would not need to be superintelligent to outcompete humans in virtually any endeavor. It would just need to have ordinary human intelligence plus infinite tireless focus.
This also implies that a way to boost focus that worked better than amphetamine (and without addiction and other side effects) and similar things would be much more significant for human potential than a way to boost IQ.
The other alternative would be to drastically extend life span, allowing us to slow down and be okay with that. The reason we tend to fast forward everything so much is that we don't live very long. The systems of capital and capital allocation that drive society run at a speed that is far in excess of what our dopamine systems are adapted to handle so they can deliver results within an acceptably small fraction of a human life span.
Either we are too slow or too short lived. Pick one.
- 15457345234 3y agoAmphetamines are truly an evil drug, they bring out and emphasise the worst qualities of people.
- ativzzz 3y agoJust like most everything else in life, amphetamines lie on a spectrum. People like Paul Erdos[0] would disagree completely. People who are prone to addictive behavior should stay away from recreational cocaine use. Meth is pretty destructive. But lots of people basically become functional (ADHD) on amphetamine. [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Erd%C5%91s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Erd%C5%91s
- api 3y agoI've seen people with ADD/ADHD go from basically non-functional to brilliant and together from a very modest dose of amphetamine or something similar. You don't see the same gains in people without these conditions though. It's certainly not a wonder drug for productivity or executive function in people without a condition.
- pi-e-sigma 3y agoNothing can replace intelligence potential, i.e. IQ, because it's a prerequisite for a lot of activities. Just like the height in the basketball.
- hirvi74 3y agoTime is a variable which is heavily factored into IQ scoring. At least on some sections...maybe all? I imagine if time was not a factor, then scores would be quite different. Life is usually less time constrained than some proprietary, standardized test, so I think you might be surprised at what people with "normal" IQs could accomplish if properly motivated, engaged, etc.. Then again, it's not like IQ is the be-all and end-all of intelligence measuring. It's just the (debatably) best we have now. Also, plenty of people with extraordinary IQs accomplish absolutely nothing of value in life, awful social skills, etc.. Hell, I had a professor once that while rather arrogant about her IQ, would also claim that having an IQ as high as hers is actual a disability -- you struggle to relate with people. Von Neumann didn't have that issue, but hey, everyone is different.