The Technological Singularity and super intelligence revolution

[Razgovory]

I think you're repeating the same argument for the third time, without really addressing my counter-argument.  Yes, computers can find patterns we can't comprehend, and on that basis can do better than human already at certain tasks.  Yes, they're starting with a learning algorithm a human programmed, but they take it from there and go further.

Because your counter argument doesn't work.  Your computer program is not finding patterns that are beyond human comprehension.  Someone had to comprehend what it was looking for to write the program.  Now it can find patterns that are practically impossible, but not physically impossible for human being.  Computers have been able to do what practically impossible for a human being for a while.  The mapping of the human genome is an example in which a computer did something that is practically impossible for a human being to do, but not physically impossible.  In practice nobody could sit down and jot down 3 billion base pairs.  Not because human being can't wrap their heads around it, but because it would just take to long.  A computer can record the base pairs much faster.  It is many degrees faster then a human being, just like computer program is several degrees more capable of find certain patterns.

The Singularity idea is based not just on a computer being many degrees quicker or smarter then a human being but being a different kind of smart.  Remember, it's suppose to be so much above us as we are above mice.  Humans don't just have really fast mouse brains.  Our brains are do things fundamentally different.  Things that mice can't comprehend.  You can't take a mouse's brain, speed it up, and have it read Shakespeare to you.

Likewise you can't simply create a "learning algorithm" and have a computer learn things that beyond human comprehension.  A human had to program it so it's limited by the human brain.  How would a computer know how to upgrade itself to what it doesn't know can exist?  The difference between the brain of modern man and Homo Erectus went through several "great leaps forward".  Not just in processing power, but in kind.  Evolution can do that because all her leaps are blind.  To have this singularity computer it must be able the same leaps with out know how to do so or where it's leaping to on purpose.

Like the old South Park Episode:

Step 1:  We are here

????????

Step 3: Magic computer takes us to Heaven.

Except maybe the endpoint should tip you off that it's not exactly a realistic goal.  It's interesting that people who often pride themselves as skeptics have no problem believing in magic computer heaven.

[DGuller]

My latest model is, when you break it down, is a block of about 500,000 if-then statements.  That's beyond my feeble comprehension, regardless of what you say.  I know they all collectively work, since I know that at the end of it I get a prediction that is more accurate than anything I can come up with that's explainable, but I sure can't comprehend the logic of all those 8-way interactions of variables my model is finding.

[Eddie Teach]

The singularity is imminent, and it will develop from statistical models. Actuaries will be the priests serving as our intermediaries with our new overlords.

I'm a data scientist now. 

I know. Data scientists will be the altar boys to the priests.

Show us on the doll where the actuary touched you.

[Siege]

Besides, I think scarcity is one of the most important driving force behind humanity's progress.  If you take away the carrot and the stick, the donkey won't have incentive to move forward.

Don't disregard humanity's ability to create artificial carrots.

Indeed. One of the arguments i have seen is that post scarcity is only possible as far as raw materials and well established consumer products, but some things like art will always be scarce. There can only be one original Mona Lisa, for example.

New products will also be scarce initially. But then, if we can really 3D print anything, and one day even change the atomic and molecular composition of anything into anything, then we will be free of the basic limitations of scarcity, and free to dedicate our time to self improvement and the exploration of our intellectual potential.

[DGuller]

Show us on the doll where the actuary touched you.

Nowhere. 

[Siege]

Ok Raz. You win.

Let's abandon all our computer research and let the chinese get to the singularity first.

[Iormlund]

Likewise you can't simply create a "learning algorithm" and have a computer learn things that beyond human comprehension.  A human had to program it so it's limited by the human brain.  How would a computer know how to upgrade itself to what it doesn't know can exist?  The difference between the brain of modern man and Homo Erectus went through several "great leaps forward".  Not just in processing power, but in kind.  Evolution can do that because all her leaps are blind.  To have this singularity computer it must be able the same leaps with out know how to do so or where it's leaping to on purpose.

You are quite wrong here, Raz. Computers do learn by themselves without a programmer having to explicitly tell them what to do. They've been doing it for quite a while.

[Razgovory]

My latest model is, when you break it down, is a block of about 500,000 if-then statements.  That's beyond my feeble comprehension, regardless of what you say.  I know they all collectively work, since I know that at the end of it I get a prediction that is more accurate than anything I can come up with that's explainable, but I sure can't comprehend the logic of all those 8-way interactions of variables my model is finding.

Yeah, but you understand what the if-then statements are.  You could theoretically sit down and write each one out and figure out what it means.  The computer is much faster then you and can do all 500,000 at once.  That what I mean by a difference in degree.  It does what you can do much faster and at a greater scale.

[HisMajestyBOB]

Ok Raz. You win.

Let's abandon all our computer research and let the chinese get to the singularity first.

And then we'll all be tortured for all eternity by the basilisk. 

[Razgovory]

Ok Raz. You win.

Let's abandon all our computer research and let the chinese get to the singularity first.

Just because I don't believe in magic computer heaven, doesn't mean I don't think we should do computer research.  I don't believe in Alkahest, but doesn't mean I think we should close down every chemistry department in the country.  Also why would it matter who invents it first?  In a post scarcity nobody has to compete for resources.

[Razgovory]

Likewise you can't simply create a "learning algorithm" and have a computer learn things that beyond human comprehension.  A human had to program it so it's limited by the human brain.  How would a computer know how to upgrade itself to what it doesn't know can exist?  The difference between the brain of modern man and Homo Erectus went through several "great leaps forward".  Not just in processing power, but in kind.  Evolution can do that because all her leaps are blind.  To have this singularity computer it must be able the same leaps with out know how to do so or where it's leaping to on purpose.

You are quite wrong here, Raz. Computers do learn by themselves without a programmer having to explicitly tell them what to do. They've been doing it for quite a while.

Okay.  I didn't discount that.  I said that computers can't upgrade themselves in some sort of "great leap forward".

[LaCroix]

if we could inject sentience into computers, and we add in dguller's 500,000 analogy, then I think computers could eventually upgrade themselves

[LaCroix]

Because your counter argument doesn't work.  Your computer program is not finding patterns that are beyond human comprehension.  Someone had to comprehend what it was looking for to write the program.  Now it can find patterns that are practically impossible, but not physically impossible for human being.  Computers have been able to do what practically impossible for a human being for a while.  The mapping of the human genome is an example in which a computer did something that is practically impossible for a human being to do, but not physically impossible.  In practice nobody could sit down and jot down 3 billion base pairs.  Not because human being can't wrap their heads around it, but because it would just take to long.  A computer can record the base pairs much faster.  It is many degrees faster then a human being, just like computer program is several degrees more capable of find certain patterns.

The Singularity idea is based not just on a computer being many degrees quicker or smarter then a human being but being a different kind of smart.  Remember, it's suppose to be so much above us as we are above mice.  Humans don't just have really fast mouse brains.  Our brains are do things fundamentally different.  Things that mice can't comprehend.  You can't take a mouse's brain, speed it up, and have it read Shakespeare to you.

Likewise you can't simply create a "learning algorithm" and have a computer learn things that beyond human comprehension.  A human had to program it so it's limited by the human brain.  How would a computer know how to upgrade itself to what it doesn't know can exist?  The difference between the brain of modern man and Homo Erectus went through several "great leaps forward".  Not just in processing power, but in kind.  Evolution can do that because all her leaps are blind.  To have this singularity computer it must be able the same leaps with out know how to do so or where it's leaping to on purpose.

Like the old South Park Episode:

Step 1:  We are here

????????

Step 3: Magic computer takes us to Heaven.

Except maybe the endpoint should tip you off that it's not exactly a realistic goal.  It's interesting that people who often pride themselves as skeptics have no problem believing in magic computer heaven.

some humans are capable of doing things other humans simply can't do. let's use tesla as an example. if we built teslabot, and teslabot was sentient, then teslabot could run through every single possible thought and idea in a much more efficient way than any human could possibly do. within this mass of thoughts and ideas, there's very likely some brilliant answer that humans haven't been able to reach (due to old age, real world concerns, some personal defect, etc.). through this answer, which is currently/contemporaneously unavailable to humans, teslabot uses it to solve some riddle we don't yet know exists. through this, I can see a situation where a robot eventually upgrades itself to being *actually* smarter than humans

it's not about whether the creator can create a machine that's smarter than the creator. it's whether there are things that currently exist that the creator doesn't know exist, things a machine could figure out

[DGuller]

My latest model is, when you break it down, is a block of about 500,000 if-then statements.  That's beyond my feeble comprehension, regardless of what you say.  I know they all collectively work, since I know that at the end of it I get a prediction that is more accurate than anything I can come up with that's explainable, but I sure can't comprehend the logic of all those 8-way interactions of variables my model is finding.

Yeah, but you understand what the if-then statements are.  You could theoretically sit down and write each one out and figure out what it means.  The computer is much faster then you and can do all 500,000 at once.  That what I mean by a difference in degree.  It does what you can do much faster and at a greater scale.

No, I can't figure out what it means.  You must not have programmed a lot to say that you can figure out what 500,000 if-then statements that go 10 levels deep mean.  Humans don't think in ways that would lend to them writing code like that or understanding code like that.  Just because you can tell what a 1 is and what a 0 is doesn't mean that you can comprehend what the sequences of 1s and 0s mean.

[Razgovory]

   Seriously?  You don't know what binary code is?  People can read it.  It's just not optimal for people. 

You are really hung up on scale.