Le ven. 12 juil. 2019 à 11:53, Philip Thrift <[email protected]> a écrit :
> > > AI researchers have been using *genetic algorithms* and *artificial life* > to "evolve" AI programs since the 1970s. > > @philipthrift > > I know, that's why I'm asking Terren about his position... > > > On Friday, July 12, 2019 at 3:28:59 AM UTC-5, Quentin Anciaux wrote: >> >> 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/58fcc534-b708-4ded-a8da-75c3e9d923ff%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/58fcc534-b708-4ded-a8da-75c3e9d923ff%40googlegroups.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/CAMW2kArc7p3ryxio3HR%2BPpr7ibPTNRjjHd0wU7Q_w5ZNejhWcQ%40mail.gmail.com.
