You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Larks comments on Superintelligence Reading Group - Section 1: Past Developments and Present Capabilities - Less Wrong Discussion

25 Post author: KatjaGrace 16 September 2014 01:00AM

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

Comments (232)

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

Comment author: Larks 19 September 2014 12:55:26AM 6 points [-]

This is an excellent question, and it is a shame (perhaps slightly damning) that no-one has answered it. On the other hand, much of this chapter will have been old material for many LW members. I am ashamed that I couldn't think of anything either, so I went back again looking for things I had actually changed my opinion about, even a little, and not merely because I hadn't previously thought about it.

  • p6 I hadn't realised how important combinatorial explosion was for early AI approaches.
  • p8 I hadn't realised, though I should have been able to work it out, that the difficulties in coming up with a language which matched the structure of the domain was a large part of the problem with evolutionary algorithms. Once you have done that you're halfway to solving it by conventional means.
  • p17 I hadn't realised about how high volume could have this sort of reflexive effect.
Comment author: KatjaGrace 22 September 2014 03:40:33AM 1 point [-]

Thanks for taking the time to think about it! I find your list interesting.