<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:#000000"><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:18.6667px"> If we can define exactly what is intelligence, it is no longer intelligence. spike</span><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:#000000">Have to query you again - no one is ever going to define any abstract concept to the point where all people accept it, and furthermore, accept the means by which to test it. I really don't know how to respond to your quote above but it bothers me - seems self-contradictory. bill w</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 12:52 PM <<a href="mailto:spike@rainier66.com">spike@rainier66.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US"><div class="gmail-m_-3850468631608162389WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> extropy-chat <<a href="mailto:extropy-chat-bounces@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat-bounces@lists.extropy.org</a>> <b>On Behalf Of </b>William Flynn Wallace<br><b>Sent:</b> Thursday, May 16, 2019 8:59 AM<br><b>To:</b> ExI chat list <<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [ExI] stealth singularity<u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p><div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(34,34,34)"> They are just “good” rather than intelligent. Two different things, often conflated. <u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(34,34,34)"> <u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(34,34,34)">Spike’s postulate: any algorithm we know how to write is not AI, by definition.<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:16pt;font-family:Arial,sans-serif;color:rgb(34,34,34)"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:16pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"">>…<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34)">For the first - explanation please. Your definition of intelligence</span>…<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34)"><u></u><u></u></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">OK. Ever since the notion of artificial intelligence was invented (hipsters, when was that?) every time some arbitrary definition of what constitutes intelligence was achieved, the goalposts had to be moved. Reason: we could look at the code, see there was nothing magic or impossible to explain, so… we had to redefine intelligence as something more. If we can define exactly what is intelligence, it is no longer intelligence.<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">BillW, this has been particularly difficult on the chess world, as chess programs got to where they were just as creative, imaginative, artistic and all that as the best humans, in fact… better. So… apparently chess doesn’t require intelligence. Consequently… the chess world discovered that…<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">…we are stupid.<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">Damn that was an ego buster.<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:16pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"">>…<span style="color:rgb(34,34,34)">For the second - you mean that humans cannot write software that turns into AI? They will have to do it themselves??</span><u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">I sure do mean that. Humans are not collectively smart enough to write software which meets our (ever changing) definition of intelligent software. Only AI software is smart enough to write AI software. Just as humans eventually wrote chess software which is better at chess than any of the guys who wrote it, artificial intelligence software can write artificial intelligence software which is more intelligent than itself.<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">When (or if) this happens, it is the singularity.<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">The reason why the singularity hasn’t happened (as far as we know) is that humans are not intelligent enough to write even the dumbest artificial intelligence program. We can’t write AI at all, not even AI which is as stupid as a box of rocks or as dumb as that young representative from NY. We don’t know how. If we can’t even get to that level, software is still far too dumb to write a smarter version of itself. We aren’t smart enough to write software smart enough. Yet. <u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">So… on we wait.<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:16pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:rgb(34,34,34)">As for MS - I hope they include a 'turn the damn thing off' button.</span><span style="font-size:16pt"><u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:16pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";color:rgb(34,34,34)">bill w<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">Thanks for that comment BillW. <u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">My mother has been a computer user since the 1960s. She took a minor in computers in her accounting degree in 1972, owned a PDP8 for her accounting business in the 70s. She has been a PC owner and user since 1982. Recently her frustration level has increased steadily to the point where she is ready to dump the whole thing in the trash, all because MicroSloth keeps changing things. In her younger years, that wasn’t a problem, but at age 80… it damn well is a problem. She wants to use the computer to do her things: home crafts, genealogy, hobbies etc, and wants to learn about those things, not mess with new computer stuff anymore, just use it to get to her favorite hobby sites.<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">For some time I have been thinking about a FSB feature to add to one’s computer, which would be kind of an operating system shell. Every time MicroSloth makes any change of any kind, this software would somehow incorporate what it did and translate everything back to work, look and feel exactly the way it did when the user locked it in with the FSB feature. <u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">Note on the name: it doesn’t need to be FSB. Picture a cop in a bad neighborhood, hears a noise where it shouldn’t be, sees a perp, draws his weapon and politely suggests FREEZE SLIME BALL! Well, the wretched bastard better damn well do it, better just exactly stop moving forthwith, or get shot down like a rabid dog. OK, freeze slime ball = FSB = stop moving forthwith. Your computer does everything you really need or want, you don’t care to learn any new bells or whistles, you want to stop fooling with the latest software innovation and just use the damn thing for what you want to do with it full stop. So… freeze slime ball: FSB.<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">Some of you computer hipsters, please run with the ball on this. We could help old people and dumb people (two different things, similar difficulties.) We could make a buttload of money. Come on guys, let’s get er dun.<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt">spike<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:14pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p></div></div></div></div>_______________________________________________<br>
extropy-chat mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a><br>
</blockquote></div>