Why human intelligence and AI will co-evolve • Hacker News Board

Re: Why human intelligence and AI will co-evolve

#41

Post by JoeAltmaier » Thu, Sep 03, 2015, 8:05 PM UTC

giardini wrote: post #37

jameshart wrote: post #31

What a bizarre logical leap this early paragraph makes to try to explain why AI is beyond the capabilities of mere humans: "AI can be thought of as a search problem over an effectively infinite, high-dimensional landscape of possible programs. Nature solved this search problem by brute force, effectively performing a huge computation involving trillions of evolving agents of varying information processing capability…

"You might as well argue that since heavier-than-air-flight is a search problem over an effectively infinite, high-dimensional landscape of possible machines - and that since it took evolution billions of years to produce birds, we have little chance of stumbling upon a working design for a wing." Tired analogies between AI and flight are dead-ends. Until we have identified AI-side components of the analogy that corr…

Also, flight took very little to evolve - it happened separately for birds, mammals, lizards, insects. In less than billions of years.

Re: Why human intelligence and AI will co-evolve

#42

Post by danans » Thu, Sep 03, 2015, 8:14 PM UTC

Moshe_Silnorin wrote: post #40

danans wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the objection isn't that those people didn't make huge and transformative contributions to the field. Rather, it is the tone set by the use of the worshippy word "genius", which has a murky, and totally relative definition, and the phrase "unusual cognitive ability", which implies that their abilities uniquely set these people apart from others who we don't worship in the same way. Uncounted numbers people ha…

Some people run faster than others, some people think better. This is not worship, merely the celebration of the best intellectual performers.

Sure, but the question is whether by celebrating those individuals so much, we exaggerate their uniqueness, and we understate the role that their circumstances played in their performance, whether intellectual or physical.

Re: Why human intelligence and AI will co-evolve

#43

Post by jameshart » Thu, Sep 03, 2015, 8:26 PM UTC

giardini wrote: post #37

jameshart wrote: post #31

What a bizarre logical leap this early paragraph makes to try to explain why AI is beyond the capabilities of mere humans: "AI can be thought of as a search problem over an effectively infinite, high-dimensional landscape of possible programs. Nature solved this search problem by brute force, effectively performing a huge computation involving trillions of evolving agents of varying information processing capability…

"You might as well argue that since heavier-than-air-flight is a search problem over an effectively infinite, high-dimensional landscape of possible machines - and that since it took evolution billions of years to produce birds, we have little chance of stumbling upon a working design for a wing." Tired analogies between AI and flight are dead-ends. Until we have identified AI-side components of the analogy that corr…

I'm not making an analogy between AI and flight, I'm refuting an analogy between 'evolving' and 'inventing' solutions using flight as a counterexample.

Re: Why human intelligence and AI will co-evolve

#44

Post by cousin_it » Thu, Sep 03, 2015, 8:26 PM UTC

0xdeadbeefbabe wrote: post #22

CmonDev wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sub-200 IQ men guessing what a 1000+ IQ man would do :).

It's probably safe to say he'd get bullied, but what do I know :).

Unless his looks, fitness, and social skills are also lvl 1000. Why not? Doesn't seem far fetched for a designer baby. In fact, giving him the perfect jawline is probably way easier than giving him 1000 IQ.

Re: Why human intelligence and AI will co-evolve

#45

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Sep 03, 2015, 8:35 PM UTC

[deleted]

Re: Why human intelligence and AI will co-evolve

#46

Post by atom-morgan » Thu, Sep 03, 2015, 8:59 PM UTC

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #3

Why do people think they can build anything worthy of the name "AI" by just fucking around with neural networks instead of by specifying exactly what sort of models and exactly what sort of inference constitute "intelligence" in the first place? It's like trying to build an airplane by studying hang-gliders instead of aerodynamics.

> Why do people think they can build anything worthy of the name "AI" by just fucking around with neural networks instead of by specifying exactly what sort of models and exactly what sort of inference constitute "intelligence" in the first place?

Doesn't this go back to the second paragraph of the article?

Re: Why human intelligence and AI will co-evolve

#47

Post by SpaceManNabs » Thu, Sep 03, 2015, 9:14 PM UTC

[deleted] wrote: post #45

[deleted]

What makes you say that? I don't see anything in the article that seems to demand that it came from an physics mindset, except for a few references to physics history that are pretty well-known.

Re: Why human intelligence and AI will co-evolve

#48

Post by jameshart » Thu, Sep 03, 2015, 9:15 PM UTC

jessriedel wrote: post #36

jameshart wrote: post #31

What a bizarre logical leap this early paragraph makes to try to explain why AI is beyond the capabilities of mere humans: "AI can be thought of as a search problem over an effectively infinite, high-dimensional landscape of possible programs. Nature solved this search problem by brute force, effectively performing a huge computation involving trillions of evolving agents of varying information processing capability…

Huh? He's not arguing that "AI is beyond the capabilities of mere humans". (Where did you get that from?) He's arguing that it's a hard problem, that the presence of lots of brains can lead people to mistakenly conclude it's easy, and that it will be easier with smarter humans. His argument would have worked just as well concerning heavier-than-air-flight, meaning that just because we see birds everywhere doesn't mea…

Hmm. I very strongly got the opposite impression.

"Today, we need geniuses like von Neumann and Turing more than ever before. That’s because we may already be running into the genetic limits of intelligence.... AI research also pushes even very bright humans to their limits.... The detailed inner workings of a complex machine intelligence (or of a biological brain) may turn out to be incomprehensible to our human minds—or at least the human minds of today". (emphasis mine)

The entire thesis seems to be we will need artificial cognitive enhancements to be able to comprehend AI sufficiently to create it. It really sounds like he thinks we are too dumb to figure this out, that we are just scrabbling around in the dark trying solutions at random.

Re: Why human intelligence and AI will co-evolve

#49

Post by SpaceManNabs » Thu, Sep 03, 2015, 9:17 PM UTC

woodchuck64 wrote: post #26

> Cognitive engineering, via direct edits to embryonic human DNA, will eventually produce individuals who are well beyond all historical figures in cognitive ability. Now that would be truly foolhardy. Blindly augmenting intelligence before cognitive moral reasoning is completely understood would be a recipe for incredibly dangerous psychopaths. At least with AI, you don't have a system that has been fine-tuned by eo…

Are you assuming ethics and intelligence disparate? Intelligent humans aren't necessarily void of empathy, morality, and emotion.

Re: Why human intelligence and AI will co-evolve

#50

Post by imaginenore » Thu, Sep 03, 2015, 9:23 PM UTC

> experts predicted that computers would gain human-level ability around the year 2050, and superhuman ability less than 30 years after

That is such a weird estimate. Once AI reaches human ability, it will take a few hours-days at most to improve itself to become superhuman. And then it will rapidly approach singularity in a few hours more. Only a severe limitation of resources or a nuke will stop it at that point. It can probably figure out a way around these issues.