Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why human intelligence and AI will co-evolve

nautil.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 112 posts

Re: Why human intelligence and AI will co-evolve

#71

Post by rl3 »

This article mistakenly conflates enhanced human intelligence with an increase in AI safety.

While it is possible, it could just as well be that more intelligent humans may actually diminish AI safety via way of rapid progress in certain branches of research.

Higher levels of intelligence do not necessarily mean appreciation for adequate safety measures. There's a lot of very, very intelligent AI researchers right now that think nothing of AGI risk, or otherwise lump it into the "it will evolve with us" category, as this article does.

The problem is that even if we do gradually become smarter via augmenting our intelligence, it doesn't necessarily preclude the emergence of a superintelligent agent.

The following slide from Bostrom's Superintelligence serves to illustrate this point:

http://assets.vice.com/content-images/contentimage/175822/Sc...

Re: Why human intelligence and AI will co-evolve

#72

Post by jameshart »

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #60
jameshart wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 min…

>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". Did he really say that? I probably should avoid talking right now . Ahaha. Ahahahahaaaa. Oh boy. I mean, the mind isn't that hard to crack once you start conceiving of exactly what problems it was designed to solve, what functions it wa…

While it's great to hear of progress in the AI research sphere, if you are working in this field, and are truly close to creating true artificial intelligence, I have a little tip for you:

You probably want to learn not to include maniacal laughter in your forum posts.

Just, you know, when you do combine the concepts into theories into worldviews, and you come to post your "Show HN: Generative causal inference in turing-complete domains replicates cognitive-psychology experiments" announcement to share with the world that you have birthed a genuine universal AI, please don't start that post off:

"Ahaha. Ahahahahaaaa."

People will likely get entirely the wrong idea.

Re: Why human intelligence and AI will co-evolve

#73

Post by Nevermark »

giardini wrote: post #58
jameshart wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Whatever. Unfortunately, in doing so you have used the "AI is analogous to heavier-than-air-flight" meme. Please discard it, it's an albatross to discussion. Or to be more precise, it is a lead balloon - it never gets off the ground; it's a red herring. IOW you've chosen a poor and annoyingly wrongheaded counterexample. Now try and digest that.

If you use an argument and someone provides a single counter example, then your argument is false. That's it.

You can continue arguing your conclusion or view, but you need to find another argument to support it.

The fact that humans could invent super-flight despite not being able to build a bird means that the argument that we cannot build a super intelligent machine because we don't yet know how to make ourselves biologically more intelligent, is not a good argument.

Re: Why human intelligence and AI will co-evolve

#74

Post by ykumar6 »

I look at AI as a continuum or evolution of software to do more for humans.

Today, if you make a phone call and a computer operator picks up, the experience is not as nice as it could be. In 50 years, it may become indistinguishable from talking with a human.

Similarly, a google search may become more intelligent. Facebook is already going this way with Project M.

Calling a cab via uber may result in a software-driven car picking us up. There is no evidence this kind of intelligence will threaten humans. It's just a tool.

Humans are in the business of solving problems, AI helps us solve problems. Killing us is not solving a problem

Re: Why human intelligence and AI will co-evolve

#75

Post by deciplex »

6d0debc071 wrote: post #28

There is a less happy story in which the attempts at ubermensch are mentally disabled. That they will remain so for quite some time, considering the moral horror potentially involved in the experiments, until the errors we make allow us to gain a fuller understanding of the system sufficient to know which changes are wise to make. The article seems to take for granted that it is possible to make alterations to a comp…

We're not going to get much smarter through mere genetic engineering. At best, it would be the first step of (hopefully) many.

Re: Why human intelligence and AI will co-evolve

#76

Post by yellowapple »

jameshart wrote: post #72
eli_gottlieb wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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". Did he really say that? I probably should avoid talking right now . Ahaha. Ahahahahaaaa. Oh boy. I mean, the mind isn't that hard to crack once you start conceiving of exactly what problems it was designed to solve, what functions it wa…

While it's great to hear of progress in the AI research sphere, if you are working in this field, and are truly close to creating true artificial intelligence, I have a little tip for you: You probably want to learn not to include maniacal laughter in your forum posts . Just, you know, when you do combine the concepts into theories into worldviews, and you come to post your "Show HN: Generative causal inference in tu…

Implying that "mad scientist creates an artificial intelligence" is anything but the right idea :)

Re: Why human intelligence and AI will co-evolve

#78

Post by Retra »

cousin_it wrote: post #44
0xdeadbeefbabe wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

We could give him 200 IQ and five heads.

Re: Why human intelligence and AI will co-evolve

#79

Post by [deleted] »

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #61
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…

>At least with AI, you don't have a system that has been fine-tuned by eons of evolution to manipulate people at least partly against their own interests. As a smart person, I actually find this remarkably insulting. Not only do I have little desire to manipulate others, I have little ability . I'm much better with computers than with manipulating people.

[deleted]

Re: Why human intelligence and AI will co-evolve

#80

Post by yellowapple »

ykumar6 wrote: post #74

I look at AI as a continuum or evolution of software to do more for humans. Today, if you make a phone call and a computer operator picks up, the experience is not as nice as it could be. In 50 years, it may become indistinguishable from talking with a human. Similarly, a google search may become more intelligent. Facebook is already going this way with Project M. Calling a cab via uber may result in a software-drive…

> Killing us is not solving a problem

Weeeeeeelllllll...

Killing "us" (defining "us" to be humans in general) could solve the problem (if it's a "problem" at this point) of humans over-consuming natural resources. It could also solve the "problem" of "these terrorists need to be killed" or "these infidels need to be killed" (depending on which side is the one using AI to kill things).

While I don't believe these are the best solutions, they certainly are "solutions" to their respective problems nonetheless.

Post reply on HN