thehowler Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 And how do we know how "organic brain material" approaches the task of playing Space Invaders? Or indeed, how we "learn" or "self organise" anything? Pure conjecture. Most of us, I imagine, didn't start playing video games driven solely by the ambition to earn more points (though that may be one element), the sole ambition for DeepMind, as one example. My point was that they're very selective with what could be described as bio-inspired or mimicry, it's got little in common with natural selection over the aeons, these are mathematical ploys. It's perhaps a slender point, but I don't think it's valid to describe machine learning as nature mimicry. Looking and learning about the people working in AI, that Engels line (was it him?) about who educates the educators comes to mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mirror Mirror Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 TLDR what's the skinny? Have you seen beyond the singularity? You should read it, you really should. TLDR:- AI will not come gradually, one moment it will seem to be still a long way off, the next everything wil have changed. It will either herald our immortality or be the end of us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XswampyX Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 (edited) You should read it, you really should. TLDR:- AI will not come gradually, one moment it will seem to be still a long way off, the next everything wil have changed. It will either herald our immortality or be the end of us. I quite like the bit about a super brain AI with the morals of a spider. Eeeeek! Edit to add. I had a picture in my mind of this giant spider smoking a cigar with a monocle over one of his eight eyes, purring to some vacant politician about how he (the spider) was going to make the world a better place...... for giant spiders! Edited February 17, 2016 by XswampyX Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpectrumFX Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 You should read it, you really should. TLDR:- AI will not come gradually, one moment it will seem to be still a long way off, the next everything wil have changed. It will either herald our immortality or be the end of us. OK, I read it. It's a lot of words to say that people are poor at understanding the exponential function. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldbug9999 Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 (edited) And how do we know how "organic brain material" approaches the task of playing Space Invaders? Or indeed, how we "learn" or "self organise" anything? It's perhaps a slender point, but I don't think it's valid to describe machine learning as nature mimicry. If nature is incapable of deliberate design then the only alternative left is self organizing emergent behaviour. With the latter the precise mechanism probably doesn't matter so its sufficient to mimic the self organizing emergent meta mechanisms. We know that evolution is trial and error and we know that leaning is trial an error (obvious if you've ever watched a child learn to walk or speak) so its those aspects that we are mimicking. Just as with flight for example we mimic the way nature generates lift by creating airflow over an aerofoil shape even though the precise mechanism of causing the airflow (props or jets vs flapping) doesnt need to be the same. Edited February 18, 2016 by goldbug9999 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gigantic Purple Slug Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 You should read it, you really should. TLDR:- AI will not come gradually, one moment it will seem to be still a long way off, the next everything wil have changed. It will either herald our immortality or be the end of us. No evidence to support this though. At the moment we are simulating simple brains and bits of more complex ones. The evidence suggests that we're going to understand/have small parts of complex brains long before we have the entire thing. It's a process that will happen gradually. Of course if you hook your nuclear button up to some experimental fly brain code (or indeed any code) that could have some unpleasant consequences, probably not from malicious AI though. I think its right to ask questions about the morality issues regarding AI and the safety threats it poses. These questions/analysis will develop along with the AI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PopGun Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Accelerating, pish! The Greeks had a working computer 2,000+ years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antikythera_mechanism Personal computers, pagers, and the internet were all around in 1985. Even mobile phones. Imo it's inevitable that computer processing advancement will hit a wall at some point without some significant game changer. Even the last great game changer public internet is 90% porn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitemice Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 More accurately the free market does the distribution part- where policy comes into play is where re-distribution is the desired result. On the question of how much should go to the worker vs the owner... This is a complex market based question with both workers and owners trying to maximize their share of the pie. However government policy shows a strong owner-bias: anti-strike, anti-union, pro-immigration (a disaster for the unskilled), anti-small-business creation, resulting in significantly more pie for the owners. ...like the factory that produces needed goods but pollutes the river- then why should some of the cost of dealing with this fallout not be imposed on those who caused it? I'm fine with a company that fires a bunch of employees, having to give them reasonable compensation/retraining/reemployment. However, if a competitor with superior technology out competes another company. That business should definitely not be liable for the jobs lost in that failed company. If that were the case, whenever you purchased a car (or rode a bus) you'd have to pay a premium to compensate the horse drawn carriage industry, and many others. ...Google succeed in bringing self driving vehicles to market the result could be many thousands of jobs lost in the commercial driving sector- so who is responsible for dealing with all these unemployed people... An interesting example. Clearly Google should be paying a rate of tax in the UK decided by UK voters, and not Irish or Swiss voters. However, these mass layoffs are almost a decade away with plenty of warning. That should be enough lead time for people to retrain and/or not enter an industry? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riedquat Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 On the question of how much should go to the worker vs the owner... This is a complex market based question with both workers and owners trying to maximize their share of the pie. However government policy shows a strong owner-bias: anti-strike, anti-union, pro-immigration (a disaster for the unskilled), anti-small-business creation, resulting in significantly more pie for the owners. A view shared by an awful lot of other people who don't really stand to gain from that much of it. It's all about maximising the size of the pie, above all other things. That's great for those at the top who get a bigger slice of a larger pie, quite what's in it for the rest of us with this endless drive towards greater efficiency, higher production, and all the downsides necessary to produce it (an increasinly dehumanising world) is beyond me, unless there's a (probably unjustified) hope that we'll eventually move beyond this like we did the last time that happened (Industrial Revolution). However the long-term effect of that was to sort out some basics of living, the motivation now is a bit less clear-cut. Make it possible to spread those basics to the rest of the world in a sustainable manner perhaps, but I won't hold my breath on that happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longgone Posted April 29, 2019 Share Posted April 29, 2019 no just the warehouse https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-6971329/Ocado-reveals-huge-blaze-Andover-warehouse-started.html#comments Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightowl Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 Has anyone else heard of the hype curve? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hype_cycle AI will change capitalism (or whatever distorted version of us we now have) but not how people over-predict. Remember Virtual Reality was going to do the same? The internet would make everybody millionaires? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.