= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Risto_Saarelma comments on The Irrationality Game - 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 (910)
You're putting 'effectively' here in place of 'intelligently' in the original assertion.
I understand "capable of behaving intelligently" to mean "capable of achieving complex goals in complex environments", do you disagree?
I don't disagree. Are you saying that humans aren't capable of achieving complex goals in the domains of quantum mechanics or computer programming?
This is of course a matter of degree, but basically yes!
Can you give any idea what these complex goals would look like? Or conversely, describe some complex goals humans can achieve, which are fundamentally beyond an entity with a similar abstract reasoning capabilities as humans have, but lack some of humans' native capabilities for dealing more efficiently with certain types of problems?
The obvious examples are problems where a slow reaction time will lead to failure, but these don't seem to tell that much about the general complexity handling abilities of the agents.
I'll try to give examples:
For computer programming: Given a simulation of a human brain, improve it so that the simulated human is significantly more intelligent.
For quantum mechanics: Design a high-temperature superconductor from scratch.
Are humans better than brute-force at a multi-dimensional version of chess where we can't use our visual cortex?
We have a way to use brute force to achieve general optimisation goals? That seems like a good start to me!
Not a good start if we are facing exponential search-spaces! If brute-force would work, I imagine the AI-problem would be solved?
Not particularly. :)
But it would constitute an in principle method of bootstrapping a more impressive kind of general intelligence. I actually didn't expect you would concede the ability to brute force 'general optimisation' - the ability to notice the brute forced solution is more than half the problem. From there it is just a matter of time to discover an algorithm that can do the search efficiently.
Not necessarily. Biases could easily have made humans worse than brute-force.
Please give evidence that "a more impressive kind of general intelligence" actually exists!