= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
CarlShulman comments on The impact of whole brain emulation - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (34)
The population boom to the Malthusian limit (and a lower Malthusian limit for AI than humans) is an overwhelmingly important impact (on growth, economic activity, etc) that you don't mention, but that is regularly emphasized.
Do you think mathematics and CS, or improvement of brain emulation software and other AI, wouldn't go much further with 1000 people working for a million years, than 100 million people working for 10 years?
It is a toss up as far as I am concerned, depends what the search space of maths/cs looks like. People seem to get stuck in their ways and dismiss other potential pathways. I'm envisioning the difference (for humans at least) to be like running a hill climbing algorithm from 1000 different points for a million years or 100 million different points for 10 years. So if the 1000 people get stuck in local optima they may do worse compared to someone who get lucky and happens to search a very fertile bit of maths/cs for a small amount of time.
Also you couldn't guarantee that people would maintain interest that long.
Lastly the sped up people would also have to wait 100,000 times longer for any practical run. Which are still done in lots of CS/AI. Even stuff like algorithm design.
So unless you heavily modded humans first, I'm not sure it is slam dunk for the sped up people.