5 ms·

Its not. Mostly it is an argument that turing-completeness is too mathematical to be practical. > I still had the mainstream belief that AI would be just as ca

Its not. Mostly it is an argument that turing-completeness is too mathematical to be practical. > I still had the mainstream belief that AI would be just as capable as humans.

avmich 3y ago
I'm not sure what is more mainstream - belief that AIs are as capable as humans, or belief that they are not. Roger Penrose is one of the more authoritative, for lack of other arguments, voices for humans being more capable than AIs. Still not sure if it implies an existence of God, a class of ability higher than Turing machine or something else.
- forgotmyinfo 3y ago
  All it implies is that brains are immensely complicated and have kajillions of connections, which don't work the same as anything branded AI. Consciousness can be an emergent property AND AI capability can be largely oversold at the same time.
- Vecr 3y ago
  > class of ability higher than Turing machine Yes it does, it would mean that your brain can somehow exploit quantum gravity to turn itself into an oracle machine. How a wet blob significantly hotter than room temperature (in the superconductor definition) is supposed to do that I don't know.
  - kian 3y ago
    that's a good question, but the electron transport chain and photosynthesis are both postulated/(known?) to exploit quantum effects at room temperature.
K0balt 3y ago
Humans have not demonstrated any capability that is not theoretically computable, AFAIK.
- _factor 3y ago
  I haven’t seen anything yet that a Turing machine can’t do that we do. A better question might be: Can we do things “faster” than a Turing machine theoretically can? If there is any quantum effect either used directly or measured within our brains, it might provide a speed advantage.
  - Vecr 3y ago
    > If there is any quantum effect either used directly or measured within our brains, it might provide a speed advantage. That's what I was getting at with the temp. comment, as I suppose an oracle machine could theoretically be classical.

Its not. Mostly it is an argument that turing-completeness is too mathematical to be practical. > I still had the mainstream belief that AI would be just as capable as humans.

avmich 3y ago

I'm not sure what is more mainstream - belief that AIs are as capable as humans, or belief that they are not. Roger Penrose is one of the more authoritative, for lack of other arguments, voices for humans being more capable than AIs. Still not sure if it implies an existence of God, a class of ability higher than Turing machine or something else.

forgotmyinfo 3y ago
All it implies is that brains are immensely complicated and have kajillions of connections, which don't work the same as anything branded AI. Consciousness can be an emergent property AND AI capability can be largely oversold at the same time.
Vecr 3y ago
> class of ability higher than Turing machine Yes it does, it would mean that your brain can somehow exploit quantum gravity to turn itself into an oracle machine. How a wet blob significantly hotter than room temperature (in the superconductor definition) is supposed to do that I don't know.
- kian 3y ago
  that's a good question, but the electron transport chain and photosynthesis are both postulated/(known?) to exploit quantum effects at room temperature.

K0balt 3y ago

Humans have not demonstrated any capability that is not theoretically computable, AFAIK.

_factor 3y ago
I haven’t seen anything yet that a Turing machine can’t do that we do. A better question might be: Can we do things “faster” than a Turing machine theoretically can? If there is any quantum effect either used directly or measured within our brains, it might provide a speed advantage.
- Vecr 3y ago
  > If there is any quantum effect either used directly or measured within our brains, it might provide a speed advantage. That's what I was getting at with the temp. comment, as I suppose an oracle machine could theoretically be classical.