[ExI] online resources for identifying symbols

[Anders Sandberg]

On 2013-12-12 06:48, spike wrote:
>
>
> This is analogous to computer chess in a way.  A long time ago, 
> computers could play a good game at the really fast speeds and in open 
> positions.  So a human could beat a computer for a long time if the 
> human would play into super-closed positions with lots of blocked 
> pawns and long pawn chains.  So computers gradually got better, but 
> for a long time, you could beat one if you knew how to play its 
> weaknesses, but if it managed to tear open the position, forget it, 
> you might as well climb in the coffin and pull the lid shut behind you.
>

This is exactly what Kasparov said too. So after Deep Blue  he very much 
took a "if you can't beat em', join em'" view and started freeform 
chess. He is currently interested in constructing smarter ways of 
pooling human and machine intelligence for solving important problems 
(like political decisionmaking).

> This whole thing again has me thinking about singularity scenarios 
> where software surpasses human abilities in a lot of areas but the big 
> S Singularity still doesn't happen.
>

As Damien wrote, besides the Spike there is the Swell. We might get a 
very broad singularity.

If you can use the software to amplify your capabilities or a group can 
do it, then you might get a big S singularity even without AI. Many 
technologies seem to be mutually amplifying: if you can build nanotech 
you can make a lot of computer power to brute-force some classes of 
problem, with lower-case ai you can do a lot of automated engineering 
and research, a bit of intelligence amplification may allow better 
strategizing, and so on. It will be fun to see how it works out.

-- 
Dr Anders Sandberg
Future of Humanity Institute
Oxford Martin School
Oxford University

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20131212/9ff557ce/attachment.html>