4 ms·
Recursive self-improvement is not necessary for AGI. Humans are general intelligences even though we cannot RSI.
by Sharlin 27d ago
Recursive self-improvement is not necessary for AGI. Humans are general intelligences even though we cannot RSI.
- samename 27d agoWho says we can't RSI? At a macro view, successive generations of humans are more productive, live longer, wealthier and smarter.
- stult 27d agoHumanity might be able to, humans cannot
- busyant 26d agoIf we (as a species) can genetically modify embryos to make our offspring more athletic, more intelligent, more <whatever>, is that human-RSI? That's not a gotcha question. I'm just genuinely curious if that would meet the definition of RSI.
- concrete_head 27d agoNot smarter in terms of reasoning ability. Just able to draw on the collective experience from all those who lived prior.
- maplethorpe 27d ago> we cannot RSI Speak for yourself.
- cortesoft 27d agoDoesn’t the history of civilization show RSI? Or even evolution itself? Isn’t that just RSI writ large?
- Sharlin 26d agoEvolution and human intelligence are two entirely separate optimizers. Evolution improving intellence is not an example of self-improvement, recursive or not. Evolution improving evolution itself would be a self-improvement process. Human intelligence improving human intelligence would be a self-improvement process. Both processes do exist in a weak sense, and future technological advances might allow human self-improvement to a much higher degree. Indeed human intelligence augmentation has always been considered one of the potential (if not the most plausible) ways to superintelligence. This is all rather rudimentary stuff discussed in detail in the so-called "Sequences", the long series of Less Wrong posts by Yudkowsky back around 2010.