On Feb 14, 10:37 am, 1Z <peterdjo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Feb 12, 2:22 pm, Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > That's what being dumb is - not being able to figure out how to do
> > anything else than what you already do.
> Then no AI is fully dumb, since all are adaptive to some extent.
It doesn't adapt intentionally, it is programmed to imitate
adaptation. In a sense it's not fully dumb, but it's the trivial sense
of dumb. In the deeper sense, it literally devoid of understanding or
> > Intelligence is the ability to
> > make sense of any given context
> "Any"? Then no human is fully intelligent.
Right. We have no intelligence in contexts which we can't make sense
of. We could be as dumb as computers are relative to some higher
> > and to potentially transcend it, which
> > is why it can't be programmed or simulated (but it can be imitated
> > trivially for specific functions). If it weren't that way we would not
> > be having this discussion.
> That we are having this discussion does not prove we
> are infinitely adaptable, as your definition "intelligent" requires.
We're not infinitely adaptable nor even is intelligence infinitely
adaptable, but sense is. Even non-sense is a kind of sense. That we
are having this discussion proves only that we have the potential to
transcend our own programming. Machines don't gather together while we
aren't watching and try to improve their programming.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at