4 ms·
The irony here, maybe unperceived by yourself, is that you're using one science fiction concept (time travel) to opine about the inevitability of another scienc
by oska 2y ago
The irony here, maybe unperceived by yourself, is that you're using one science fiction concept (time travel) to opine about the inevitability of another science fiction concept (artificial intelligence).
- avazhi 2y agoHow is that ironic? Time travel doesn’t exist and - as far as we understand physics currently - isn’t possible. I don’t think any serious man would suggest that AGI is impossible; the debate really centres around the time horizon for AGI and what it will look like (that is, how will we know when we’re finally there). In this care it was merely a rhetorical device.
- oska 2y ago> I don’t think any serious man would suggest that AGI is impossible Plenty of ppl would suggest that AGI is impossible, and furthermore, that taking the idea seriously (outside fiction) is laughable. To do so is a function of what I call 'science fiction brain', which is why I found it ironic that you'd used another device from science fiction to opine about its inevitability.
- avazhi 2y agoHappy for you to cite some thinkers who are on record as saying it’s impossible. I’ll wait.
- AlotOfReading 2y agoNot the OP, but Searle of Chinese room fame came up with the aforementioned argument to demonstrate just that.
- kbelder 2y agoI find it amazing that the Chinese room is considered a serious argument by so many. Unless you believe in mysticism, it's refuted by pointing to your own head.
- avazhi 2y agoAlso in a less snarky vein: https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/14scx6y/to_all_skeptics_with_a_background_in_aics_what_is/ https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/14scx6y/to_all... I’m not a singularity truther and personally I think we are more likely to be centuries rather than decades away from AGI, but I quite literally know of nobody who thinks it’s impossible in the same way that, say, time travel is impossible. Even hardcore sceptics just say we are going down the wrong rabbit hole with neural nets, or that we don’t have the compute to deal with the number calculations we’d need to simulate proper intelligence - none of them claim AGI is impossible as a matter of principle. Those mentioned are tractable problems.