= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Liso comments on SRG 4: Biological Cognition, BCIs, Organizations - 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 (139)
This is also one of points where I dont agree with Bostrom's (fantastic!) book.
We could use analogy from history: human-animal = soldier+hourse didnt need the physical iterface (like in Avatar movie) and still added awesome military advance.
Something similar we could get from better weak AI tools. (probably with better GUI - but it is not only about GUI)
"Tools" dont need to have big general intelligence. They could be at hourse level:
This probably needs more explanation. You could tell that my reaction is not in appropriate place. It is probably true. BCI we could define like physicaly interconnection between brain and computer.
But I think in this moment we could (and have) analyse also trained "horses" with trained "raiders". And also trained "pairs" (or groups?)
Better interface between computer and human could be done also in nonivasive path = better visual+sound+touch interface. (hourse-human analogy)
So yes = I expect they could be substantially useful also in case that direct physical interace would too difficult in next decade(s).