3 ms·
There is a massive fallacy in this paragraph: "This doomsday scenario can’t happen. Intelligence is a product of learning. A brain, no matter how big or how fa
by ElectronCharge 12y ago
There is a massive fallacy in this paragraph:
"This doomsday scenario can’t happen. Intelligence is a product of learning. A brain, no matter how big or how fast, does not become intelligent until it learns. In humans, learning is a slow process requiring practice, repetition and study over many years. Unlike humans, intelligent machines can be cloned, transferring the learning from one machine to a new one, eliminating the learning time. However, for an intelligent machine to discover new truths, to learn new skills, to extend knowledge beyond what has been achieved before, it will need to go through the same difficult and slow discovery process humans do. Yes, an intelligent machine could think much faster than a biological brain, but the slower process of discovery still has to occur."
The person writing this fails to understand the difference between engineering and biological evolution. The AI would be engineered to begin with. There would be nothing haphazard or extraneous about its design. The "slow process of discovery" would be bootstrapped, as stated, by "cloning" (copying extremely fast memory compared with humans). Then, the AI would attack new problems with very likely a minimum 100-1 speed advantage over humans, based on electronic versus chemical speeds. Nerve impulses travel at well less than 100 miles per hour, versus the over 150,000 miles per second of electronic impulses.
Consider a first-gen AI engineer, with "only" a 150 IQ human equivalent intelligence, attempting to design a better AI. Such an AI would have no distractions (food, sleep or sex) and would likely have a monomaniacal focus on its job. It would have a perfect, near-instantaneous memory of arbitrary size (we can already do this). I expect it would in fairly short order produce an IQ 300 version of itself, and that that cycle would likely continue.
That is the basis for the idea of the "singularity", and I find it completely believable. What it would mean, I don't know...and neither does anyone else. We have the same relationship to an IQ 1000 AI that a chimp has with us.
That is the concern that Musk, Hawking and others share.
- p1esk 12y agoYou're confusing "brain" and "intelligence". A brain will be engineered to begin with. Then is has to learn. Once it learns some amount of information, it is intelligent, and this intelligence can be cloned. However, to increase its intelligence, that brain has to start learning again. And this process can be slow, because it is limited by the speed of experimentation. I agree that the machine will probably be able to learn faster than humans, but it's not at all clear how much faster. Also, we know little about human intelligence. For example, Einstein's brain wasn't much bigger or faster than an average human brain, yet he could make profound discoveries. It's not clear to me that if you take an average brain, and make it faster/bigger, it will suddenly be able to make scientific breakthroughs.