On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 6:04 PM, Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, April 3, 2013 5:44:24 PM UTC-4, Jason wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 7:58 AM, Telmo Menezes <te...@telmomenezes.com>wrote: >> >> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 1:23 PM, Craig Weinberg <whats...@gmail.com>wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Then shouldn't a powerful computer be able to quickly deduce the >>>> winning Arimaa mappings? >>>> >>> >>> You're making the same mistake as John Clark, confusing the physical >>> computer with the algorithm. Powerful computers don't help us if we don't >>> have the right algorithm. The central mystery of AI, in my opinion, is why >>> on earth haven't we found a general learning algorithm yet. Either it's too >>> complex for our monkey brains, or you're right that computation is not the >>> whole story. I believe in the former, but not I'm not sure, of course. >>> Notice that I'm talking about generic intelligence, not consciousness, >>> which I strongly believe to be two distinct phenomena. >>> >>> >> >> Another point toward Telmo's suspicion that learning is complex: >> >> If learning and thinking intelligently at a human level were >> computationally easy, biology wouldn't have evolved to use trillions of >> synapses. The brain is very expensive metabolically (using 20 - 25% of the >> total body's energy, about 100 Watts). If so many neurons were not needed >> to do what we do, natural selection would have selected those humans with >> fewer neurons and reduced food requirements. >> > > There's no question that human intelligence reflects an improved survival > through learning, and that that is what makes the physiological investment > pay off. > Right, so my point is that we should not expect things like human intelligence or human learning to be trivial or easy to get in robots, when the human brain is the most complex thing we know, and can perform more computations than even the largest super computers of today. > What I question is why that improvement would entail awareness. > A human has to be aware to do the things it does, because zombies are not possible. Your examples of blind sight are not a disproof of the separability of function and awareness, only examples of broken links in communication (quite similar to split brain patients). > There are a lot of neurons in our gut as well, and assimilation of > nutrients is undoubtedly complex and important to survival, yet we are not > compelled to insist that there must be some conscious experience to manage > that intelligence. Learning is complex, but awareness itself is simple. > I think the nerves in the gut can manifest as awareness, such as cravings for certain foods when the body realizes it is deficient in some particular nutrient. Afterall, what is the point of all those nerves if they have no impact on behavior? Jason -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
