[soulofmischief]

> Expecting anything more is to defy logic and physics.

What logic and physics are being defied by the assumption that intelligence doesn't require the specific biological machinery we are accustomed to?

This is a ridiculous comment to make, you do nothing to actually prove the claims you're making, which are even stronger than the claims most people will make about the potential of AGI.

[echelon]

I'll take the other side of the bet.

Human intelligence seems likely to be a few tricks we just haven't figured out yet. Once we figure it out, we'll probably remark on how simple a model it is.

We don't have the necessary foundation to get there yet. (Background context, software/hardware ecosystem, understanding, clues from other domains, enough people spending time on it, etc.) But one day we will.

At some point people will try to run human-level AGI intelligences on their Raspberry Pi. I'd almost bet that will be a game played in the future - run human-level AGI intelligences on as low a spec machine as possible.

I also wonder what it would be like if the AGI / ASI timeline coincide with our ability to do human brain scans at higher fidelity. And that if they do line up, that we might try replicating our actual human thoughts and dreams on our future architectures as we make progress on AGI.

If those timelines have anything to do with one another, then when we crack AGI, we might also be close to "human brain uploads". I wouldn't say it's a necessary precondition, but I'd bet it would help if the timelines aligned.

And I know the limits of detection right now and in the foreseeable future are abysmal. So AGI and even ASI probably come first. But it'd be neat if they were close to parallel.

[jqpabc123]

What logic and physics are being defied

The logic and physics that make a computer what it is --- a binary logic playback device.

By design, this is all it is capable of doing.

Assuming a finite, inanimate computer can produce AGI is to assume that "intelligence" is nothing more than a binary logic algorithm. Currently, there is no logical basis for this assumption --- simply because we have yet to produce a logical definition of "intelligence".

Of all people, programmers should understand that you can't program something that is not defined.

[Ukv]

> By design, this is all it is capable of doing. Assuming a finite, inanimate computer can produce AGI is [...]

Humans are also made up of a finite number of tiny particles moving around that would, on their own, not be considered living or intelligent.

> [...] we have yet to produce a logical definition of "intelligence". Of all people, programmers should understand that you can't program something that is not defined.

There are multiple definitions of intelligence, some mathematically formalized, usually centered around reasoning and adapting to new challenges.

There are also a variety of definitions for what makes an application "accessible", most not super precise, but that doesn't prevent me improving the application in ways such that it gradually meets more and more people's definitions of accessible.

[soulofmischief]

Are you a programmer? Are you familiar with Alan Turing [0]?

What do you mean by finite, are you familiar with the halting problem? [1]

What does "inanimate" mean here? Have you seen a robot before?

Imprecise language negates your entire argument. You need to very precisely express your thoughts if you are to make such bold, fundamental claims.

While it's great that you're taking an interest in this subject, you're clearly speaking from a place of great ignorance, and it would serve you better to learn more about the things you're criticizing before making inflammatory, ill-founded claims. Especially when you start trying to tell a field expert that they don't know their own field.

Using handwavy words you don't seem to understand such as "finite" and "inanimate" while also claiming we don't have a "logical definition" (whatever that means) of intelligence just results in an incomprehensible argument.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_machine [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem