[ExI] Polanyi's Personal Coefficient

[John Galt]

Both! Suppose ten advanced AIs were tasked with writing the best possible review of the book (but not by any means necessary). Which is the best of the ten? They all think theirs is. Plus while AI<AGI, no AI is going to make the human discovery--hey this 70yo book is suddenly relevant today because it identifies the exact thing it is impossible for AI to supply (it turns out), which idea should frame the review.

Any MCU fans? JARVIS is an advanced AI. Tony Stark relies extensively on him (Iron Man 2), to synthesize a new element. But Stark directly governs the process and development steps even though Jarvis conducts 99% of the labor. No one questions that Stark invented this element and solution when it finally works.

Suppose instead Stark said, Jarvis -- figure out how to make this Arc Reactor stop making me sick -- and went to sleep. When he wakes up, Jarvis has a solution (probably not a new element). I would say in this latter case Stark did not make an invention and claiming so is fraud.

The difference is not how advanced is the AI, but what the human does.

johngaltbooks at proton.me

> About this book and its relevance to modern AI, I just had an argument
> with one AI and a discussion with another AI.
> What strikes me is that if I were contemplating writing a review of
> the book, then the modern AIs could probably write a better review
> than me. So is that relevance or just ironic?
> 
> BillK
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>