= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
cupholder comments on Preface to a Proposal for a New Mode of Inquiry - 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 (83)
One thing the world has is an abundance of human minds. We actually do not need machines that think like humans - we have humans. What we need is two other things: machines that do thinking that humans find difficult (like the big number crunchers) and one-off machines that are experimental proofs-of-concept for understanding how a human brain works (like Blue Brain). As far as getting the glory for doing what many said was impossible and unveiling a mechanical human-like intelligence, forget the glory because they will just move the goal posts.
I believe that what is needed is to leave sequential operations and learn how to effectively use parallel operations. This would get close to a human intelligence and would also advance the power of computing of a non-human but useful kind.
I think you are so very right about the importance of prediction. !!! And looking forward to later posts.
We have an abundance of ordinary human minds. We don't have an abundance of genius human minds. For all I know, machines that thought like Shakespeare or Mill or Newton could be a godsend.
One can make a case that genius is precisely the degree to which one does not think like a human mind (at least in a more useful and/or beautiful way).
Depends how broadly you're drawing the line around the 'human mind' concept. I'd say that since Shakespeare, Mill and Newton's minds were all human minds, that's a prima facie case for saying they think like humans.