SteveG comments on Superintelligence Reading Group 2: Forecasting AI - Less Wrong

10 Post author: KatjaGrace 23 September 2014 01:00AM

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

Comments (109)

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

Comment author: SteveG 23 September 2014 01:41:08AM 1 point [-]

We need to chart as many plausible pathways as we can think of for algorithmic and neuromorphic technologies, and for specific questions within each AI sub-domain.

Comment author: KatjaGrace 23 September 2014 01:44:03AM 2 points [-]

Thank you. To be clear, you think these are the most promising approaches to predicting the event we are interested in (some better specified version of 'human-level AI')?

How expensive do you think it would be to do this at the level of detail you are suggesting? Who would ideally do it?

Comment author: SteveG 23 September 2014 01:57:11AM 2 points [-]

We'll have a start-up phase where we specify the project, select software and brainstorm some model templates.

After that, we'll be able to get a better handle on costs.

We're talking about a serious scientific effort with dozens of people.

Comment author: SteveG 23 September 2014 01:59:20AM 2 points [-]

Fortunately, we can begin with less, and we can get quite far.

Comment author: SteveG 23 September 2014 01:53:35AM 2 points [-]

People with experience in Bayesian forecasting need to work with academic, industry and government experts in AI sub-domains and computer hardware.

I envision a forecast calibration and validation process, and a periodic cycle of updates every 1-3 years.