P=NP will not get rid of the nubs.P=NP will not go better with coke.P=NP will not fight germs that may cause bad breath.P=NP will put you in the drivers seat. There will be no pictures of P=NP pushing that shopping cart down the block on the dead run.
P=NP will not be televised, will not be televised, will not be televised. P=NP will be no rerun;P=NP will be live. ~PM > Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 21:42:19 -0500 > Subject: Re: [agi] human brain implies P = NP > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > > On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 5:31 PM, Samantha Atkins <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Exactly. If P=NP then any level of godlike machine you can dream of can be > > built. All encryption is pointless as a minor side effect. :) > > P=NP won't help you build AI. Neural networks will still take just as > long to evaluate and train. Vision, language, robotics, and modeling > human behavior are hard because of the amount of data that has to be > processed and learned, but it is already O(n). It will not speed up > search problems like simulated evolution. > > P=NP doesn't solve the halting problem or get around Rice's theorem or > the uncomputability of Kolmogorov complexity. In practice, this means > that software testing would still be hard and imperfect. Theorem > proving and AIXI would still not be computable. AIXI^tl would still > requires exponential time because it is not an NP-hard problem. > > P=NP won't solve quantum mechanics. This means you still couldn't > write a program that inputs chemical formulas and outputs chemical > properties like the freezing point of water. > > P=NP doesn't eliminate chaos. Weather forecasts would not be any more > accurate. > > P=NP doesn't eliminate Goedel incompleteness. There will still be math > problems we can't solve (like whether P=NP). > > P=NP will break all encryption as you said. This will complicate > decentralized AI designs (like my proposed CMR) because agents would > not be able to securely identify themselves to establish reputations > as reliable data sources. The Internet would be far more vulnerable > and probably useless and unusable. Electronic banking would require > moving information over physically secure channels, making credit > cards mostly impractical. > > -- > -- Matt Mahoney, [email protected] > > > ------------------------------------------- > AGI > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/19999924-4a978ccc > Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com ------------------------------------------- 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
