On Sunday, February 18, 2018 at 8:35:59 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: > > > > On 2/18/2018 12:15 PM, [email protected] <javascript:> wrote: > > > > On Sunday, February 18, 2018 at 12:09:37 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: >> >> >> >> On 2/18/2018 6:11 AM, Lawrence Crowell wrote: >> >> On Sunday, February 18, 2018 at 4:25:07 AM UTC-6, Russell Standish wrote: >>> >>> On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 05:19:22PM -0800, Brent Meeker wrote: >>> > >>> > >>> > On 2/17/2018 4:58 PM, [email protected] wrote: >>> > > But what is the criterion when AI exceeds human intelligence? AG >>> > > >>> > > >>> https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-02-16/father-artificial-intelligence-singularity-less-30-years-away >>> >>> > >>> > So we need to sharpen the question. Exactly *what* is 30yrs away? >>> > >>> > Brent >>> > >>> >>> According to the title (I haven't RTFA), it's the >>> singularity. Starting from a point where a machine designs, >>> and manufactures improved copies of itself, technology will supposedly >>> veer from it's exponential path (Moore's law) etc to hyperbolic. Being >>> hyperbolic, it reaches infinity within a finite period of time, >>> expected to be a matter of months perhaps. >>> >>> Given that we really don't understand creative processes (not even >>> good old fashioned biological evolution is really well understood), >>> I'm sceptical about the 30 years prognostication. It is mostly based on >>> extrapolating Moore's law, which is the easy part of technological >>> change. >>> >>> This won't be a problem for my children - my grandchildren perhaps, if >>> I ever end up having any. >>> >>> Cheers >>> >> >> One thing a computer can not do is ask a question. I can ask a question >> and program a computer to help solve the problem. In fact I am doing a >> program to do just this. I am working a computer program to model aspects >> of gravitational memory. What the computer will not do, at least computers >> we currently employ will not do is to ask the question and then work to >> solve it. A computer can find a numerical solution or render something >> numerically, but it does not spontaneously act to ask the question or to >> propose something creative to then solve or render the solution. >> >> >> You must never have applied for a loan online. >> > > It can only do what it has been programmed to do. I can't act independent > of its program, such as wondering if some theory makes sense, or coming up > with tests of a theory. Or say, it can't invent chess, it can only play it > better than humans. It can't "think" out of the box. AG > > > Yes, keep repeating that over and over. Repitition makes a convincing > argument...for some people. > > Brent >
*What's your countervailing evidence? You want to think it can think, and that's YOUR repetitious argument. AG * -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
