= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Vladimir_Nesov comments on Let's reimplement EURISKO! - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (151)
Not exactly, Thom. Roughly, for FAI you need precise self-modification. For precise self-modification, you need a precise theory of the intelligence doing the self-modification. To get to FAI you have to walk the road that leads to precise theories of intelligence - something like our present-day probability theory and decision theory, but more powerful and general and addressing issues these present theories don't.
Eurisko is the road of self-modification done in an imprecise way, ad-hoc, throwing together whatever works until it gets smart enough to FOOM. This is a path that leads to shattered planets, if it were followed far enough. No, I'm not saying that Eurisko in particular is far enough, I'm saying that it's a first step along that path, not the FAI path.
Well, in this sense computing is also a first step on that path, Moore's law of mad science and all. Eurisko in particular doesn't seem to deserve more mention than that.
Doesn't seem to deserve more mention than the creation of computing? Sure. But computing has already been created.
Um, so has Eurisko.
...indeed. It seems that I failed to figure out just what I was arguing against. Let me re-make that point.
As far as first steps along that path go, they have already been taken: we have gone from a world without computers to a world with one, and we can't reverse that. The logical place to focus our efforts would seem to be the next step which has not been taken, which could very well be reimplementing EURISKO. (Though it could also very well be running a neural net on a supercomputer or some guy making the video game "Operant Conditioning Hero".)
We have gone from a world without dictators to a world with one, and we can't reverse that. The logical place to focus our efforts would seem to be the next step which has not been taken, which could very well be resurrecting Hitler.
Seriously? I did not think a discussion of Eurisko could be Godwinned. Bravo.
While grandparent was probably a miscalculation of some sort, I feel that mentioning Hitler is more acceptable if the context is Nazi super science than outrage maximization.
Resurrecting Hitler would probably teach us a lot about medicine, actually. If we can generalize the process by which we resurrect Hitler, we could save a lot of lives.
True, if resurrecting Hitler is a good idea and we can cause it to happen; if resurrecting Hitler is inevitable and we can ensure that he ends up being a good guy; or if resurrecting Hitler would be bad and we can prevent it from happening.