|
|
|
|
|
|
by seanmcdirmid
3065 days ago
|
|
|
> Omnipotent AI is not a theory. That's not what was suggested. Human-level intelligence is sufficient to cause a singularity (because then they can start improving their own programs). > better prediction about AI is they will surpass us in some ways and not others. That isn't a better prediction at all. Regardless, it is uninteresting to my original point, which is we want to live in the Iron Man, not Ultron, phase now anyways. |
|
|
Your assumption is that human-level intelligence is bound by offline simulation capacity.
If humans are already optimally utilizing offline simulation (in the biological world we call that imagination) then the “human level” AI will have just the same limitations as a human.
That’s the counter-proposal you have to make falsifiable for your guess to become a hypothesis:
That any human-level AI, in order to become human level, will be bound to the same interactive constraints on learning that humans are.
Think about World War II for example: were strategies limited by offline simulation capacity, or were they limited by the fact that you can only try (and therefore sample consequences for) one at a time?
I’m not making a claim here either way: I’m just saying you wave this whole debate away by saying “human intelligence plus unlimited simulation equals superhuman intelligence”
I’m not saying your wrong, it’s an interesting thought experiment: I’m just saying not only is there zero evidence for that, there’s not even (to my knowledge) a robust model describing the mechanism by which that could expect to be true.