Why do you always argue via evolution and DNA? DNA requires a vast
amount of overhead and comes with tons of evolutionary baggage that is
irrelevant to our intelligence but was/is required in order to make the
system evolve/work. Also we do not have a lot of the restraints that
evolution had ... like being extremely energy efficient or caring that
much about heat dissipation or compactness and mobility.
The power all of our brains consume is 0.4TW (50Watt * 8billion people).
The total power consumption of the human world in 2010 was 16 TW.
Clearly we have way more options than evolution in terms of energy
constraints, in terms of vehicle/body constraints, in terms of a priory
intelligence. The only question is when our algorithms will be good
enough to result in AGI on our admittedly inferior hardware (compared to
nature). And whether the singularity of irrelevant entropy (i.e.
societal collapse) will be a show-stopper for the technological singularity.
-- jc
On 04/02/2013 06:41 PM, Matt Mahoney wrote:
For AGI, that would be your DNA. If you
compress it, and compare it to the compressed size of typical code, it
comes out to 300 million lines, or $30 billion.
-------------------------------------------
AGI
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424
Modify Your Subscription:
https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
