[red75prime]

Far-fetched conclusions based on a misinterpretation of "no free lunch" theorem. The theorem doesn't forbid intelligence which is universal only in our own universe, as our own universe doesn't give us uniform distribution of all possible problems.

[visarga]

I tend to believe that a hole in François' argument is that a sufficiently powerful computer could simulate an environment inside, where the AI could thrive.

[red75prime]

A hole? In that Swiss cheese? It's hardly surprising. He uses hypothetical Chomsky language device to support his idea of "there couldn't be general intelligence", while there's provably optimal intelligent agent (AIXI) and its computable approximations. He uses the self-improvement trends established by entities which aren't intelligent agents (military empires, civilization, mechatronics, personal investing) to predict what self-improvement of intellectual agent will be like. It's a pure London-streets-overflowing-with-bullshit level prediction.

I am not extreme singularitarian. There are hard physical limits making exponential progress and singularity impossible. But bad arguments are bad arguments, it doesn't matter if conclusions are appealing.