<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
A couple of days back, Stefano stated, in his own way, my usual
clarification when the discussion of AI starts to drift toward the
spiritual:<br>
<br>
<pre wrap="">Mmhhh. What defeated Kasparov was a program, not a computer. The
computer merely offered sufficient power to choose moves in the time
required.
If we free Kasparov's opponent from tournament rules regarding time,
and we execute this very program on <b class="moz-txt-star"><span class="moz-txt-tag">*</span>anything<span class="moz-txt-tag">*</span></b>, including a Chinese
Room or a Turing machine or a Babbage engine or 30.000 slaves playing
logic circuits in a plain, the end result would not change.
I describe for people with who tend to see the computer as something more than what it is (a misunderstanding that is greatly aided with the widespread and deliberate misuse of terms such as artificial "intelligence") the fact that the basic element of the digital computer, the bit, is perfectly modeled by an empty beer can. A beer can is bi-stable, and can represent a 1 or a 0 in binary. Given enough time and space, and enough beer cans, the most fantastic operation of any computer anywhere could be exactly duplicated with beer cans. (I know exactly how computers work, I've built them, and I program them -- which I declare as sufficient background for making such a claim.)
There's a bunch of talk that always goes on about computer "intelligence," with some predicting a time when the things, with the right software, will become actually intelligent. In order for me to accept such a concept, it would have to survive the envisioning of a warehouse full of beer cans being manipulated in response to the same algorithm, and with a result adequate to leave me convinced the warehouse was my intellectual superior.
The digital computer is a tool, in my mind, as the abacus is a tool, and as the fingers are tools (for basic math). I'm not going to bother logging onto my computer, or get out my calculator, when I just want to double check that 4 + 3 = 7; I'll just use my fingers. On the other hand, if I want to know what 77! is, I'll crank up my computer. "The right tool for the job" is what my grandpa probably used to say. The computer is faster at multiplication than I will ever be, and it's a great tool for stuff like that. Beer cans would work, too, but that would take too long, and get too many of my friends hung over in preparing them for faster execution speed. There a lot of other tools around that we use to make our tasks easier, or to extend our own capabilities. Pliers, can openers, lawn mowers and TV clickers come to mind. If we improve each of them radically over a number of years, is the time foreseeable when these other tools will become, in fact, equal or superior
to humans?
FutureMan
</pre>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 7/2/2011 7:42 AM, john clark wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:1309617771.97239.YahooMailClassic@web82903.mail.mud.yahoo.com"
type="cite">
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="font: inherit;" valign="top"> On <b>Fri, 7/1/11,
Mike Dougherty <i><a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:msd001@gmail.com"><msd001@gmail.com></a></i></b>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(16, 16,
255); margin-left: 5px; padding-left: 5px;"><br>
<div class="plainMail">"So what? If google decided to
make AGI the relevant keyword tomorrow<br>
your "metric" would be inverted."<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
If that were to happen and so many people knew what the
term meant that Steven Spielberg made a multimillion
dollar blockbuster movie called "AGI", then the
dilettantes would dream up yet another obscure term that
they were certain was unknown by most because, as I've
said before, when your ideas are shallow clarity of
expression is not your friend. <br>
<blockquote style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(16, 16,
255); margin-left: 5px; padding-left: 5px;">
<div class="plainMail">You don't like the term "AGI"?</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="plainMail"> No. <br>
</div>
<blockquote style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(16, 16,
255); margin-left: 5px; padding-left: 5px;">
<div class="plainMail">Don't use it.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
I don't.<br>
<blockquote style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(16, 16,
255); margin-left: 5px; padding-left: 5px;">
<div class="plainMail">If context requires a
disambiguation between narrow AI, wide AI, some other
kind of run-of-the-mill AI and the super-special kind
of AI [...]<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
So you want us to believe that if you were to say
something like "AI will likely bring on the extinction of
biological human beings and lead to computers able to
engineer the universe" you worry that people will
misunderstand you and think you are referring to
"run-of-the-mill AI", so purely in the interests of
clarity you will use "AGI" instead, a recently made up
term that virtually nobody is familiar with. I flat out
don't believe you.<br>
<br>
John K Clark<br>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<pre wrap="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>