Hi, Is it not how evolution is working ? By iteration and random modification, new better organisms come to existence ?
Why AI could not use iterating evolution to make better and better AI ? Also if *we build* a real AGI, isn't it the same thing ? Wouldn't we have built a better, smarter version of us ? The AI surely would be able to build another one and by iterating, a better one. What's wrong with this ? Quentin Le ven. 12 juil. 2019 à 06:28, Terren Suydam <[email protected]> a écrit : > Sure, but that's not the "FOOM" scenario, in which an AI modifies its own > source code, gets smarter, and with the increase in intelligence, is able > to make yet more modifications to its own source code, and so on, until its > intelligence far outstrips its previous capabilities before the recursive > self-improvement began. It's hypothesized that such a process could take an > astonishingly short amount of time, thus "FOOM". See > https://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/AI_takeoff#Hard_takeoff for more. > > My point was that the inherent limitation of a mind to understand itself > completely, makes the FOOM scenario less likely. An AI would be forced to > model its own cognitive apparatus in a necessarily incomplete way. It might > still be possible to improve itself using these incomplete models, but > there would always be some uncertainty. > > Another more minor objection is that the FOOM scenario also selects for > AIs that become massively competent at self-improvement, but it's not clear > whether this selected-for intelligence is merely a narrow competence, or > translates generally to other domains of interest. > > > On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 2:56 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Advances in intelligence can just be gaining more factual knowledge, >> knowing more mathematics, using faster algorithms, etc. None of that is >> barred by not being able to model oneself. >> >> Brent >> >> On 7/11/2019 11:41 AM, Terren Suydam wrote: >> > Similarly, one can never completely understand one's own mind, for it >> > would take a bigger mind than one has to do so. This, I believe, is >> > the best argument against the runaway-intelligence scenarios in which >> > sufficiently advanced AIs recursively improve their own code to >> > achieve ever increasing advances in intelligence. >> > >> > Terren >> >> >> -- >> 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 view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/304332c1-13a6-7006-651b-494e468eefc4%40verizon.net >> . >> > -- > 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 view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAMy3ZA9xK%3DibZqo%3DxQcqSVZXjTu3pnAiTvRLF_8-LHVRth8F_w%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAMy3ZA9xK%3DibZqo%3DxQcqSVZXjTu3pnAiTvRLF_8-LHVRth8F_w%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy Batty/Rutger Hauer) -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAMW2kAoZrj4nXJ_EFCCSupSOWP_ows52ECR3w3zLBrNg8UDsyg%40mail.gmail.com.
