[ExI] stealth singularity

William Flynn Wallace foozler83 at gmail.com
Thu May 16 18:35:30 UTC 2019

 If we can define exactly what is intelligence, it is no longer
intelligence.  spike
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

On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 12:52 PM <spike at rainier66.com> wrote:

> *From:* extropy-chat <extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org> *On Behalf
> Of *William Flynn Wallace
> *Sent:* Thursday, May 16, 2019 8:59 AM
> *To:* ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [ExI] stealth singularity
>   They are just “good” rather than intelligent.  Two different things,
> often conflated.
> Spike’s postulate: any algorithm we know how to write is not AI, by
> definition.
> >…For the first - explanation please.  Your definition of intelligence…
> 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.
> 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…
> …we are stupid.
> Damn that was an ego buster.
> >…For the second - you mean that humans cannot write software that turns
> into AI?  They will have to do it themselves??
> 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.
> When (or if) this happens, it is the singularity.
> 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.
> So… on we wait.
> As for MS - I hope they include a 'turn the damn thing off' button.
> bill w
> Thanks for that comment BillW.
> 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.
> 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.
> 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.
> 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.
> spike
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20190516/1d47e4ef/attachment.htm>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list