We can engage and do so without overarching understanding of what we are doing and stuff will emerge out of our activities. AI will be (and is!) in my opinion emergent phenomena. We don’t really understand it, but we are accelerating its emergence never the less.
Modern software systems with millions of lines of code are not fully understood by anybody anymore, people know about small specific regions of a system and some architects have a fuzzy and rather vague understanding of system dynamics as a whole, but mysterious stuff is already happening (ex. Google (or some researchers from Google) has recently reported that its photo recognition smart systems are acting in ways that the programmers don’t fully comprehend and that are not deterministic – i.e. explicable based on working through the code) If you look at where the money is in AI research and development, it is largely focused on military, security state, and other allied sectors, with perhaps an anomaly in the financial sector where big money is being thrown at smart arbitrage systems. We will get the kind of AI we pay for. -Chris From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Platonist Guitar Cowboy Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2014 7:57 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: AI Dooms Us If we engage a class of problems on which we can't reason, and throw tech at that, we'll catch the occasional fish, but we won't really know how or why. Some marine life is poisonous however, which might not be obvious in the catch. I prefer "keep it simple approaches to novelty": >From G. Kreisel's "Obituary of K. Gödel": Without losing sight of the permanent interest of his work, Gödel repeatedly stressed... how little novel mathematics was needed; only attention to some quite commonplace distinctions; in the case of his most famous work: between arithmetical truth on the one hand and derivability by formal rules on the other. Far from being uncomfortable about so to speak getting something from nothing, he saw his early successes as special cases of a fruitful general, but neglected scheme: By attention or, equivalently, analysis of suitable traditional notions and issues, adding possibly a touch of precision, one arrives painlessly at appropriate concepts, correct conjectures, and generally easy proofs- Kreisel, 1980. On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 12:37 AM, LizR <[email protected]> wrote: "I'll be back!" On 26 August 2014 07:20, 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List <[email protected]> wrote: a super-intelligent machine devoted to the killing of "enemy" human beings (+ opposing drones I suppose as well) This does not bode well for a benign super-intelligence outcome does it? -- 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
