On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 8:12 PM, John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > If you define increased intelligence as decreased probability of having >> a false belief on any randomly chosen proposition, then superintelligences >> will be wrong on almost nothing, > > > Not for a finite intelligence because some problems can be infinitely > hard. > Then they will tend to agree the problem is intractable. > And if there is simply a lack of information more intelligence will not > produce a better answer ( when Shakespeare went to the King Edward V1 > Grammar School at age 7 what was the name of his teacher?) > > That question assumes there is only one answer consistent with our history, and only one Shakespeare. All super intelligence have access to the same mathematical truth, which is such a font of information it makes the accessible physical universe appear as a mere dripping faucet in comparison. > >Therefore nearly all superintelligences will operate according to the >> same belief system. > > > There is no correlation between intelligence and maters of taste, it is > not more intelligent to prefer brussels sprouts over creamed corn or Bach > over Beethoven. > Super intelligence A and B will both agree that Brussels sprouts taste better to super intelligence B. There is no objective truth as to what thing has better taste, since taste is in the tastebuds of the taster. 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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
