Re:AI solving all our problems is nonsense
on
Marvin Minsky On AI
·
· Score: 1
No matter how smart you may be, you aren't going to magically find a way to generate energy out of nothing, or find a way to move faster than the speed of light.
Nobody said that. Even Kurzweil. The Singularity is not about breaking physical laws. It's about acceleration. Getting the results we would normally get, but faster. Way faster. Yes, some of the results of the Singularity may sound "magical" to you. In 2007. But it reminds me of a quote by Carl Sagan...
I guess the point I am reaching for is that until there is a concrete example of a machine showing insight rather than what is essentially enormous patience, the fact that they are incredibly useful for knowledge amplification is agnostic towards actual knowledge generation.
Well, we're just starting to understand how some of the parts of the brain work. We already have some interesting models to describe these parts, but there's still a lot of work to do, of course. Kurzweil believes we'll start to emulate the brain at a sufficient level of accuracy in the 30's. Or the 40's. I don't remember. For him, the Singularity will happen around 2045. I've always thought he was being too optimistic, but we'll see. Or not...
Modern computers are already too complex to design without modern computers.
Yep, that's the idea. Imagine what kind of computers you could design with an AI as powerful as a human being. That AI would be able to "think" 24 hours a day. And, by definition, it would become twice as fast a few years later (Moore's law). And so on. That's the beginning of the Singularity... When computers begin to self-optimize, without the aid of humans.
Re:singularity is a bunch of nonsense
on
Marvin Minsky On AI
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
The general justification is that there are a bunch of exponentially increasing trends in certain isolated areas of technological development, such as moore's law, which they use to justify the idea that at some point in the near future were going to have star trek like technology. A realistic and comprehensive look at our civilization of course shows that while some industries are bounding ahead, many if not most important technologies, like our ability to produce and store energy, have made little progress. Our society is making progress in many areas at an admirable clip, but nothing like the singularity is conceivably on the horizon.
Well, that's if you assume a (more or less) constant intelligence. Humans were more or less as intelligent 5000 years ago as they are now. Once AI reaches the level of human intelligence, there are reasons to think technology will progress at a faster pace (with the help of AI).
> logitech makes CRAPPY drivers. their software side of things is really bad.
On another hand, SlimServer is not the most stable/fast/modern piece of software I've ever seen.
Yes, and that's why I would be in favor of a "license" scheme. When you buy a movie (or music, or software,...), you should be able to buy "upgrades" for a smaller amount of money. For example, if I already own a movie on DVD, I should be able to buy it on Blu-Ray/HD-DVD for less than the full price, which is the price somebody who never bought that movie before would pay. But I guess that 1) it would make too much sense, and 2) it would be too complicated to implement.
Slashdot Mirror
No matter how smart you may be, you aren't going to magically find a way to generate energy out of nothing, or find a way to move faster than the speed of light.
Nobody said that. Even Kurzweil. The Singularity is not about breaking physical laws. It's about acceleration. Getting the results we would normally get, but faster. Way faster. Yes, some of the results of the Singularity may sound "magical" to you. In 2007. But it reminds me of a quote by Carl Sagan...
I guess the point I am reaching for is that until there is a concrete example of a machine showing insight rather than what is essentially enormous patience, the fact that they are incredibly useful for knowledge amplification is agnostic towards actual knowledge generation.
Well, we're just starting to understand how some of the parts of the brain work. We already have some interesting models to describe these parts, but there's still a lot of work to do, of course. Kurzweil believes we'll start to emulate the brain at a sufficient level of accuracy in the 30's. Or the 40's. I don't remember. For him, the Singularity will happen around 2045. I've always thought he was being too optimistic, but we'll see. Or not...
Modern computers are already too complex to design without modern computers.
Yep, that's the idea. Imagine what kind of computers you could design with an AI as powerful as a human being. That AI would be able to "think" 24 hours a day. And, by definition, it would become twice as fast a few years later (Moore's law). And so on. That's the beginning of the Singularity... When computers begin to self-optimize, without the aid of humans.
The general justification is that there are a bunch of exponentially increasing trends in certain isolated areas of technological development, such as moore's law, which they use to justify the idea that at some point in the near future were going to have star trek like technology. A realistic and comprehensive look at our civilization of course shows that while some industries are bounding ahead, many if not most important technologies, like our ability to produce and store energy, have made little progress. Our society is making progress in many areas at an admirable clip, but nothing like the singularity is conceivably on the horizon.
Well, that's if you assume a (more or less) constant intelligence. Humans were more or less as intelligent 5000 years ago as they are now. Once AI reaches the level of human intelligence, there are reasons to think technology will progress at a faster pace (with the help of AI).
> logitech makes CRAPPY drivers. their software side of things is really bad. On another hand, SlimServer is not the most stable/fast/modern piece of software I've ever seen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Accelerating_R eturns
Yes, and that's why I would be in favor of a "license" scheme. When you buy a movie (or music, or software, ...), you should be able to buy "upgrades" for a smaller amount of money. For example, if I already own a movie on DVD, I should be able to buy it on Blu-Ray/HD-DVD for less than the full price, which is the price somebody who never bought that movie before would pay. But I guess that 1) it would make too much sense, and 2) it would be too complicated to implement.