3 ms·

What about aliens? When little green critters finally arrive on this planet, having travelled across space and time, will you reject their intelligence because

by tux1968 1y ago

What about aliens? When little green critters finally arrive on this planet, having travelled across space and time, will you reject their intelligence because they lack human biology? What if their biology is silicon based, rather than carbon? There's really no reason to believe intelligence is tied to being human. Most of us accept the possibility (even the likelihood) of intelligent life in the universe, that isn't.

greazy 1y ago
I think you missed or ignored the human part: >human intelligence as something detached from human biology. I don't completely agree with the previous comment, but there is something to be considered to their statement.
- tux1968 1y ago
  Sure, there's little doubt that our biology shapes our experience. But in the context of this conversation, we're talking about how AI falls short of true AGI. My answer was offered in that regard. It doesn't really matter what you think about human intelligence, if you believe that non-human intelligence is every bit as valid, and there is no inherent need for any "humanness" to be intelligent. Given that, the constant drumbeat of pointing out how AI fails to be human, misses the mark. A lot of the same people who are making such assertions, haven't really thought about how they would quickly accept alien intelligence as legitimate and full-fledged... even though it too lacks any humanity backing it. And why are they so eager to discount the possibility of synthetic life, and its intelligence, as mere imitation? As a poor substitute for the "real thing"? When faced with their easy acceptance of alien intelligence, it suggests that there is in fact a psychological reason at the base of this position, rather than pure rational dismissal. A desire to leave the purely logical and mechanical, and imbue our humanity with an essential spirit or soul, that maybe an alien could have, but never a machine. Ultimately, it is a religious objection, not a scientific one.
  - vhantz 1y ago
    Alien or syntethic life will have to go through similar challenges to those that shape human life, human intelligence and our consciousness. No text prediction machine, no matter how complex or "large", has to change its evolving environment and itself, for example.
    - tux1968 1y ago
      What you are talking about is experience/knowledge, not raw intelligence. It has been proven that a Turning Machine and Lambda Calculus have the exact same equivalent expressiveness, that encompasses the _entire set_ of computable functions. Why are you so sure that "text prediction" is not equally expressive?
      - vhantz 1y ago
        Why are you so sure that reality is reducible to your notion of computation, whatever that is?
        tux1968 1y ago
        I'm all ears if you want to explain how you have a magic soul that is too important and beautiful to ever be equalled by a machine. But if intelligence is not equivalent to computation, then what is it? Don't take the easy way out of asking me to define it, you define it as something other than the ability to successfully apply computation to the environment. Was Hellen Keller not intelligent because she lacked the ability to see or hear? Is intelligence defined by a particular set of sense organs? A particular way of interacting with the environment? What about paraplegics, are they disqualified from being considered intelligent because they lack the same embodied experience as others? Whenever you give someone kudos for being brilliant, it is always for their ability to successfully compute something. If that isn't what we're discussing when we're talking about intelligence, then what are we discussing?
        vhantz 1y ago

greazy 1y ago

I think you missed or ignored the human part: >human intelligence as something detached from human biology. I don't completely agree with the previous comment, but there is something to be considered to their statement.

tux1968 1y ago
Sure, there's little doubt that our biology shapes our experience. But in the context of this conversation, we're talking about how AI falls short of true AGI. My answer was offered in that regard. It doesn't really matter what you think about human intelligence, if you believe that non-human intelligence is every bit as valid, and there is no inherent need for any "humanness" to be intelligent. Given that, the constant drumbeat of pointing out how AI fails to be human, misses the mark. A lot of the same people who are making such assertions, haven't really thought about how they would quickly accept alien intelligence as legitimate and full-fledged... even though it too lacks any humanity backing it. And why are they so eager to discount the possibility of synthetic life, and its intelligence, as mere imitation? As a poor substitute for the "real thing"? When faced with their easy acceptance of alien intelligence, it suggests that there is in fact a psychological reason at the base of this position, rather than pure rational dismissal. A desire to leave the purely logical and mechanical, and imbue our humanity with an essential spirit or soul, that maybe an alien could have, but never a machine. Ultimately, it is a religious objection, not a scientific one.
- vhantz 1y ago
  Alien or syntethic life will have to go through similar challenges to those that shape human life, human intelligence and our consciousness. No text prediction machine, no matter how complex or "large", has to change its evolving environment and itself, for example.
  - tux1968 1y ago
    What you are talking about is experience/knowledge, not raw intelligence. It has been proven that a Turning Machine and Lambda Calculus have the exact same equivalent expressiveness, that encompasses the _entire set_ of computable functions. Why are you so sure that "text prediction" is not equally expressive?
    - vhantz 1y ago
      Why are you so sure that reality is reducible to your notion of computation, whatever that is?
      - tux1968 1y ago
        I'm all ears if you want to explain how you have a magic soul that is too important and beautiful to ever be equalled by a machine. But if intelligence is not equivalent to computation, then what is it? Don't take the easy way out of asking me to define it, you define it as something other than the ability to successfully apply computation to the environment. Was Hellen Keller not intelligent because she lacked the ability to see or hear? Is intelligence defined by a particular set of sense organs? A particular way of interacting with the environment? What about paraplegics, are they disqualified from being considered intelligent because they lack the same embodied experience as others? Whenever you give someone kudos for being brilliant, it is always for their ability to successfully compute something. If that isn't what we're discussing when we're talking about intelligence, then what are we discussing?
        vhantz 1y ago