= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
gwern comments on Take heed, for it is a trap - 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 (187)
I don't see how this can make sense in one sense. If we don't know exactly how it came to our attention, we know that it didn't come to our attention in a way that stuck with us, so that is some information we have about how it came to our attention - we know some ways that it didn't come to our attention.
You're thinking of human minds. But perhaps we're talking about a computer that knows it's trying to determine the truth-value of a proposition, but the history of how the proposition got inputted into it got deleted from its memory; or perhaps it was designed to never holds that history in the first place.
So it knows that whoever gave it the proposition didn't have the power, desire, or competence to tell it how it got the proposition.
It knows the proposition is not from a mind that is meticulous about making sure those to whom it gives propositions know where the propositions are from.
If the computer doesn't know that it doesn't know how it learned of something, and can't know that, I'm not sure it counts as a general intelligence.