4 ms·

Is there an argument to be made why artificial intelligence that surpasses human intelligence is not a problem for the human race?

consz 12y ago
null hypothesis.
- davidrusu 12y ago
  We all ready have a well defined rigorous AGI[0] that would have god like intelligence. There are some approximations that played pacman [1] without knowing anything specific about pacman itself. i.e. it learned how to play by itself. [0] http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/AIXI http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/AIXI [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfsMHtmGDKE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfsMHtmGDKE
  - coldtea 12y ago
    So? You can have a neural network that "learns" tic-tac-toe by itself in 100 lines of code. Does that prove anything?
    - davidrusu 12y ago
      AIXI is an artificial 'general' intelligence. It is not hard coded to do a specific task. That neural network is useless at doing anything other than playing tic tac toe
      - coldtea 12y ago
        Actually no -- it's the neural network + biases, start values that's good at playing tic tac toe. The neural network code itself is not "hard coded" for any specific task. You could use the same neural network with different inputs to do other stuff, like recognize characters, and all kind of pattern matching / classification.
- woodchuck64 12y ago
  If by "null hypothesis", you mean artificial intelligence that exceeds human intelligence is impossible, that is a bold claim. Since human intelligence is nothing more than a successful evolutionary algorithm implemented in 3-dimensional cellular networks, it is inevitable that we'll be able to copy and improve the algorithm at some point in the future. Then we'll have artificial intelligence that exceeds human intelligence. Then what?
n09n 12y ago
Probably the same argument that human intelligence that surpasses feline intelligence is not a problem for domestic housecats.
- woodchuck64 12y ago
  Seriously? Would you want to be neutered without your consent?
  - n09n 12y ago
    If it came to that I doubt I would have a choice. And if I didn't want to, I'd probably be wrong.
- noblethrasher 12y ago
  That's just because we happen to like housecats. The whales will have some legitimate gripes. I mean, they aren't even competing with us for anything.
JohnnyBrown 12y ago
Is there an argument to be made why $HELL is not a problem for the human race?
- woodchuck64 12y ago
  $HELL? Is that SHELL with a $? Is that Shell Oil and Gas? Is Shell Oil a problem for the human race? I suppose it could be, but your point escapes me. Or maybe the $ is a typo and you mean the Christian notion of Hell? Is Hell a problem for the human race? Not likely as, even if it exists, it's only a problem in the after life. So again, your point escapes me.

consz 12y ago

null hypothesis.

davidrusu 12y ago
We all ready have a well defined rigorous AGI[0] that would have god like intelligence. There are some approximations that played pacman [1] without knowing anything specific about pacman itself. i.e. it learned how to play by itself. [0] http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/AIXI http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/AIXI [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfsMHtmGDKE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfsMHtmGDKE
- coldtea 12y ago
  So? You can have a neural network that "learns" tic-tac-toe by itself in 100 lines of code. Does that prove anything?
  - davidrusu 12y ago
    AIXI is an artificial 'general' intelligence. It is not hard coded to do a specific task. That neural network is useless at doing anything other than playing tic tac toe
    - coldtea 12y ago
      Actually no -- it's the neural network + biases, start values that's good at playing tic tac toe. The neural network code itself is not "hard coded" for any specific task. You could use the same neural network with different inputs to do other stuff, like recognize characters, and all kind of pattern matching / classification.
woodchuck64 12y ago
If by "null hypothesis", you mean artificial intelligence that exceeds human intelligence is impossible, that is a bold claim. Since human intelligence is nothing more than a successful evolutionary algorithm implemented in 3-dimensional cellular networks, it is inevitable that we'll be able to copy and improve the algorithm at some point in the future. Then we'll have artificial intelligence that exceeds human intelligence. Then what?

n09n 12y ago

Probably the same argument that human intelligence that surpasses feline intelligence is not a problem for domestic housecats.

woodchuck64 12y ago
Seriously? Would you want to be neutered without your consent?
- n09n 12y ago
  If it came to that I doubt I would have a choice. And if I didn't want to, I'd probably be wrong.
noblethrasher 12y ago
That's just because we happen to like housecats. The whales will have some legitimate gripes. I mean, they aren't even competing with us for anything.

JohnnyBrown 12y ago

Is there an argument to be made why $HELL is not a problem for the human race?

woodchuck64 12y ago
$HELL? Is that SHELL with a $? Is that Shell Oil and Gas? Is Shell Oil a problem for the human race? I suppose it could be, but your point escapes me. Or maybe the $ is a typo and you mean the Christian notion of Hell? Is Hell a problem for the human race? Not likely as, even if it exists, it's only a problem in the after life. So again, your point escapes me.