Where will artificial general intelligence come from? • Hacker News Board

Re: Where will artificial general intelligence come from?

#81

Post by SomeStupidPoint » Sat, Sep 02, 2017, 5:28 PM UTC

aeleos wrote: post #57

SomeStupidPoint wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you're wrong that AGI will have (something like) those components in its inception. I just disagree that we have to intentionally create them -- I think there are a lot of places we can experimentally bruteforce the implementation instead of having a solid theoretical understanding if our only goal is creating an AGI. I don't think we need any theoretical breakthroughs, per se, but rather, a lot of comp…

I think you are right that we could, in theory experimentally brute force intelligence. But if we try and do that, we are basically trying to simulate an entire universe and wait for intelligence. But the amount of computing power that that would require is beyond even what we can imagine. And even if we could find some ways of simplifying it, it still seems like a waste of our intelligence. Like when it got cold for…

I'll preface this by saying that my views don't necessarily represent a mainstream position here:

Humans already accidentally invented AI at least a few times, sort of. To talk meaningfully about this topic, I think it's better to step away from the topic of "intelligence" and instead speak about "reasoning ability". It's still fuzzy, but seems to sidestep a lot of the "can submarines swim" arguments.

Things like societies, governments, corporations, economies, etc all show similar features to machine learning algorithms and reasoning animals in their ability to dynamically problem solve -- the main difference is that they run on human computers instead of electronic computers. (Or photonic, quantum, etc computers.) Well, in modern times, they're actually sort of cyborgs, but that's a side issue.

The quest for an AGI is more about translating the notion of a corporation (or government, etc) meaningfully into fully electronic computer terms than it is in replicating the human mind. We know enough about the supra-structure of the corporation to meaningfully bound the search, and it's much more prudent to spend a decade on bruteforcing each component of a corporation than it is to navel gaze about reinventing minds. The truth is that human brains (or animal brains) aren't the only general intelligence that we know -- so reinventing them isn't the only path to AGI, though it's a worthwhile project in its own right.

I just worry that many of the meaningful contributions of the people working on reinventing minds will be lost on the birth of the actual first AGI through corporate cyberization. (And that many of us will fail to recognize corporate cyberization for what it is -- an AGI. Any (successful) corporation which can act fully by algorithm must be a general intelligence.)

Re: Where will artificial general intelligence come from?

#82

Post by aeleos » Sat, Sep 02, 2017, 5:42 PM UTC

SomeStupidPoint wrote: post #81

aeleos wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are right that we could, in theory experimentally brute force intelligence. But if we try and do that, we are basically trying to simulate an entire universe and wait for intelligence. But the amount of computing power that that would require is beyond even what we can imagine. And even if we could find some ways of simplifying it, it still seems like a waste of our intelligence. Like when it got cold for…

I'll preface this by saying that my views don't necessarily represent a mainstream position here: Humans already accidentally invented AI at least a few times, sort of. To talk meaningfully about this topic, I think it's better to step away from the topic of "intelligence" and instead speak about "reasoning ability". It's still fuzzy, but seems to sidestep a lot of the "can submarines swim" arguments. Things like soc…

1. What are the other general intelligence that we know of besides life?

2. How is it that you know that the reasoning abilities of the structures that we create are because of the structure, and not because we are the pieces that make up the larger structure?

Re: Where will artificial general intelligence come from?

#83

Post by npgatech » Sat, Sep 02, 2017, 5:50 PM UTC

mythrwy wrote: post #67

rdlecler1 wrote: post #29

Background: I did AI and Philosophy of Mind in undergrad, an MSc focused on ALife, then a PhD at Yale under a Macarthur Fellow who developed the theoretical framework for the 'evolution of Evolvability' where I worked on computational evolutionary biology. I can say we're not going to blindly brute force our way forward, but instead we'll need to reverse engineer nature's core algorithms to generate hard AI. Every ti…

Background: Some guy on the Internet with an unrelated Bachelors degree he didn't study that hard for and has picked up a little Python and Javascript somewhere along the way. I know of no biological forms that have evolved wheels. But wheels have turned out to be a hell of a lot faster than fins or legs. I see no reason "intelligence" has to follow the pathways or limitations of biology or neurology at all. Although…

Fair point, but you are omitting the fact that brain itself (that invented the wheel) was evolved through biological means.

That said, evolutionary optimization is generally considered unreliable(convergence) and inefficient.

Re: Where will artificial general intelligence come from?

#84

Post by ktRolster » Sat, Sep 02, 2017, 5:56 PM UTC

chanakya wrote: post #77

ktRolster wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best argument I've heard is that we can use a computer to model any physical process.....the brain is a physical process, therefore we can use a computer to model the brain. If you think that there is some process in the brain that would be theoretically impossible for computers to model, that would be an interesting topic of discussion.

The brain is a physical entity, yes, so in theory we should be able to model it, assuming we know all the laws it works on with enough precision. This is a big if, but even if that's granted, is there anything which indicates that this is imminent?

is there anything which indicates that this is imminent?

This article seems to be arguing "no." The biggest thing missing I think is an understanding of how human memory works.

Re: Where will artificial general intelligence come from?

#85

Post by red75prime » Sat, Sep 02, 2017, 5:56 PM UTC

chanakya wrote: post #77

ktRolster wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best argument I've heard is that we can use a computer to model any physical process.....the brain is a physical process, therefore we can use a computer to model the brain. If you think that there is some process in the brain that would be theoretically impossible for computers to model, that would be an interesting topic of discussion.

The brain is a physical entity, yes, so in theory we should be able to model it, assuming we know all the laws it works on with enough precision. This is a big if, but even if that's granted, is there anything which indicates that this is imminent?

Market demands. Anyway, given that GI already happened, better question would be "Are there obstacles which could prevent creation of an AGI?". I think the answer is unlikely.

Re: Where will artificial general intelligence come from?

#86

Post by mythrwy » Sat, Sep 02, 2017, 5:56 PM UTC

SomeStupidPoint wrote: post #81

aeleos wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are right that we could, in theory experimentally brute force intelligence. But if we try and do that, we are basically trying to simulate an entire universe and wait for intelligence. But the amount of computing power that that would require is beyond even what we can imagine. And even if we could find some ways of simplifying it, it still seems like a waste of our intelligence. Like when it got cold for…

I'll preface this by saying that my views don't necessarily represent a mainstream position here: Humans already accidentally invented AI at least a few times, sort of. To talk meaningfully about this topic, I think it's better to step away from the topic of "intelligence" and instead speak about "reasoning ability". It's still fuzzy, but seems to sidestep a lot of the "can submarines swim" arguments. Things like soc…

Some very good points.

I mean, what is the problem we are trying to solve here? Fully emulate a human? That's worthless, we have an overabundance of humans already and it's easy to make more.

Or are we trying to come up with something that performs our tasks without us having to think or do any work and presumably makes life richer and more pleasant? Well that's a different problem, and yes, we have been automating that forever and are arguably getting better at it. (I say arguably because "richer and more pleasant" are relative as it turns out).

The argument over what constitutes "intelligence" is not an insignificant one either. My dog likely thinks I'm stupid because I don't eat butter all day and shave and go to work. And come to think of it, he might be right. Point being, we often conceive of intelligence as "having better ways to do or get what we would". But then there is abstraction, longer term planning, higher order thinking, which in the end almost certainly will be incomprehensible to humans.

Re: Where will artificial general intelligence come from?

#87

Post by mythrwy » Sat, Sep 02, 2017, 5:58 PM UTC

npgatech wrote: post #83

mythrwy wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Background: Some guy on the Internet with an unrelated Bachelors degree he didn't study that hard for and has picked up a little Python and Javascript somewhere along the way. I know of no biological forms that have evolved wheels. But wheels have turned out to be a hell of a lot faster than fins or legs. I see no reason "intelligence" has to follow the pathways or limitations of biology or neurology at all. Although…

Fair point, but you are omitting the fact that brain itself (that invented the wheel) was evolved through biological means. That said, evolutionary optimization is generally considered unreliable(convergence) and inefficient.

The wheel existed before the mind did. It was just sitting there waiting to be noticed :)

Re: Where will artificial general intelligence come from?

#88

Post by fasquoika » Sat, Sep 02, 2017, 6:00 PM UTC

chanakya wrote: post #77

ktRolster wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best argument I've heard is that we can use a computer to model any physical process.....the brain is a physical process, therefore we can use a computer to model the brain. If you think that there is some process in the brain that would be theoretically impossible for computers to model, that would be an interesting topic of discussion.

The brain is a physical entity, yes, so in theory we should be able to model it, assuming we know all the laws it works on with enough precision. This is a big if, but even if that's granted, is there anything which indicates that this is imminent?

I think it depends on how you define "imminent". If we're talking a hundred years, well, a lot can happen in that time. We didn't even have computers a hundred years ago, and now they can do certain things that are considered particularly "human", like have a fairly coherent conversation

Re: Where will artificial general intelligence come from?

#89

Post by pookeh » Sat, Sep 02, 2017, 6:03 PM UTC

mythrwy wrote: post #87

npgatech wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair point, but you are omitting the fact that brain itself (that invented the wheel) was evolved through biological means. That said, evolutionary optimization is generally considered unreliable(convergence) and inefficient.

The wheel existed before the mind did. It was just sitting there waiting to be noticed :)

Not for the function the brain made a use of it.

Re: Where will artificial general intelligence come from?

#90

Post by skummetmaelk » Sat, Sep 02, 2017, 6:08 PM UTC

mythrwy wrote: post #67

rdlecler1 wrote: post #29

Background: I did AI and Philosophy of Mind in undergrad, an MSc focused on ALife, then a PhD at Yale under a Macarthur Fellow who developed the theoretical framework for the 'evolution of Evolvability' where I worked on computational evolutionary biology. I can say we're not going to blindly brute force our way forward, but instead we'll need to reverse engineer nature's core algorithms to generate hard AI. Every ti…

Background: Some guy on the Internet with an unrelated Bachelors degree he didn't study that hard for and has picked up a little Python and Javascript somewhere along the way. I know of no biological forms that have evolved wheels. But wheels have turned out to be a hell of a lot faster than fins or legs. I see no reason "intelligence" has to follow the pathways or limitations of biology or neurology at all. Although…

Wheels are useless if you don't have roads.

EDIT: Please explain your downvotes here? Don't you people see that this, coupled with there being no useful intermediate stage before developing a full wheel, prevents evolution from "inventing" it.