4 ms·

> You've selected the phrase "a Technological Singularity" and stretched the metaphor to create your definition. If you consider the example I gave and expand

> You've selected the phrase "a Technological Singularity" and stretched the metaphor to create your definition. If you consider the example I gave and expand it to other fields, it's the same thing. As I said, it's analogous to black holes. My point is, how does creativity fit into all of this?

slowmovintarget 12y ago
It isn't the same thing. But that's just argument. Let's go with the new subject of how creativity fits in. Creativity allows the expansion of a system of axioms through perceiving possibilities not permitted within the system. This allows escape from "incompleteness" [1]. Of course that is not all creativity does, but it is fairly big deal as it leads to what we tend to call "understanding" or "comprehension". Knowing how to calculate the next number in a sequence, and comprehending that the next number will always be the same as the previous (divide 1 by 3 and express as a decimal number) requires multiple levels of observation. We've been able "teach" machines discoveries of that nature that we've already made, but we haven't really been able to generate the capability. Take the case of those evolved neural net solutions that took advantage of the physical nature of the hardware to optimize a detection circuit. The optimization could only occur because there was a suitable system-external test to drive optimization. While it is feasible to allow the combination of the physical world and a definition of "survival" to serve as a suitable test for machines, the result would merely be machines that "survive". This would not be "The Singularity" of machines that out-think us, this would be the "gray goo" scenario of machines that devastate our civilization and merely replace us on the top of the food chain. My point is that there needs to be a way for the machine to generate its own tests. This, in large part, is comprehension, driven by creativity. Granted, I say all of this firmly embedded among the laity. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_t...

slowmovintarget 12y ago

It isn't the same thing. But that's just argument. Let's go with the new subject of how creativity fits in. Creativity allows the expansion of a system of axioms through perceiving possibilities not permitted within the system. This allows escape from "incompleteness" [1]. Of course that is not all creativity does, but it is fairly big deal as it leads to what we tend to call "understanding" or "comprehension". Knowing how to calculate the next number in a sequence, and comprehending that the next number will always be the same as the previous (divide 1 by 3 and express as a decimal number) requires multiple levels of observation. We've been able "teach" machines discoveries of that nature that we've already made, but we haven't really been able to generate the capability. Take the case of those evolved neural net solutions that took advantage of the physical nature of the hardware to optimize a detection circuit. The optimization could only occur because there was a suitable system-external test to drive optimization. While it is feasible to allow the combination of the physical world and a definition of "survival" to serve as a suitable test for machines, the result would merely be machines that "survive". This would not be "The Singularity" of machines that out-think us, this would be the "gray goo" scenario of machines that devastate our civilization and merely replace us on the top of the food chain. My point is that there needs to be a way for the machine to generate its own tests. This, in large part, is comprehension, driven by creativity. Granted, I say all of this firmly embedded among the laity. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_t...