timtyler comments on Existential Risk and Public Relations - Less Wrong

36 Post author: multifoliaterose 15 August 2010 07:16AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (613)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: timtyler 25 August 2010 06:11:48AM *  0 points [-]

We don't need math proofs to know how to build AGI - we can reverse engineer the brain.

There may be a few clues in there - but engineers are likely to get to the goal looong before the emulators arrive - and engineers are math-friendly.

Comment author: jacob_cannell 25 August 2010 07:08:26AM -2 points [-]

A 'few clues' sounds like a gross underestimation. It is the only working example, so it certainly contains all the clues, not just a few. The question of course is how much of a shortcut is possible. The answer to date seems to be: none to slim.

I agree engineers reverse engineering will succeed way ahead of full emulation, that wasn't my point.

Comment author: timtyler 25 August 2010 07:38:41AM 0 points [-]

If information is not extracted and used, it doesn't qualify as being a "clue".

The question of course is how much of a shortcut is possible. The answer to date seems to be: none to slim.

The search oracles and stockmarketbot makers have paid precious little attention to the brain. They are based on engineering principles instead.

I agree engineers reverse engineering will succeed way ahead of full emulation,

Most engineers spend very little time on reverse-engineering nature. There is a little "bioinspiration" - but inspiration is a bit different from wholescale copying.