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.

NxGenSentience comments on Superintelligence Reading Group 3: AI and Uploads - Less Wrong Discussion

9 Post author: KatjaGrace 30 September 2014 01:00AM

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

Comments (138)

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

Comment author: NxGenSentience 04 October 2014 11:45:03AM *  2 points [-]

lukeprog,

I remember readng Jeff Hawkins' On Intelligence 10 or 12 years ago, and found his version of the "one learning algorithm" extremely intriguing. I remember thinking at the time how elegant it was, and the multiple fronts on which it conferred explanatory power. I see why Kurzweil and others like it too.

I find myself, ever since reading Jeff's book (and hearing some of talks later) sometimes musing -- as I go through my day, noting the patterns in my expectations and my interpretations of the day's events -- about his memory - prediciton model. Introspectively, it resonates so well with the observed degrees of fit, priming, pruning to a subtree of possibility space, as the day unfolds, that it becomes kind of automatic thinking.

In other words, the idea was so intuitively compelling when I heard it that it has "snuck-in" and actually become part of my "folk psychology", along with concepts like cognitive dissonance, the "subconscious", and other ideas that just automatically float around in the internal chatter (even if not all of them are equally well verified concepts.)

I think Jeff's idea has a lot to be said for it. (I'm calling it Jeff's, but I think I've heard it said, since then, that someone else independently, earlier, may have had a similar idea. Maybe that is why you didn't mention it as Jeff's yourself, but by its conceptual description.) It's one of the more interesting ideas we have to work with, in any case.