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

Machine intelligence will surpass human intelligence, within a few decades.

kurzweilai.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 40 posts

Re: Machine intelligence will surpass human intelligence, within a few decades.

#31

Post by mdda »

KeithMajhor wrote: post #15
cageface wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Somebody needs to introduce Kurzweil to the concept of the asymptote.

I agree. Something like this maybe? http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8464115/graph_test.html

But unless you've got evidence that we've started to 'turn the other corner', doesn't your graph suggest that the level of technology is going to increase by the same factor as it did since the (say) 1950s?

And even then, maybe the AI level of technology is below the level to which we might be tending towards?

Re: Machine intelligence will surpass human intelligence, within a few decades.

#32

Post by mdda »

shriphani wrote: post #4

I have to disagree with Kurzweil here. I remember in one of the Kinect videos, the researcher who worked on the mic array explained that the billion neurons allowed such a level of processing that we could extract info from the noise easily. The amount of computational resources needed to combat information overload on one sense organ is immense. To be able to pull that off with 5 organs, regulate body function, make…

Just to pick on one piece of your argument : the difference between 1 sense organ and 5 is only a 5-fold increase. Even worst case it's like a 25-fold increase (network effect, etc). But a 25-fold increase should take less than a decade - as demonstrated by the power of the processor in your phone...

But I'll definitely agree that true AI is a difficult target to aim at, since AFAIK no-one knows what the important magical bit of intelligence is.

Re: Machine intelligence will surpass human intelligence, within a few decades.

#33

Post by mdda »

jackfoxy wrote: post #19

Will strong AI ever enjoy a gin and tonic at the end of work on a summer's day? Will it ever feel the endorphin release from a strong run on the treadmill? Of course these are rhetorical questions. AI, however you define it, is a machine, a tool. It may become arbitrarily powerful, but that's all it will ever be; and it will always be a creation of man.

And when the AI designs a machine that is superior to it, and superior to anything that man has designed - then what? Or are you suggesting that humans are 'by definition' the only beings that can be said to have created something?

The AI (or its progeny) might disagree - and be able to argue pretty convincingly... After all, somewhere down the line they'll be much smarter than any human.

Or are you also arguing that human intelligence is some kind of asymptotic limit? Tell that to a kid that's smarter than its parents, or teachers.

Re: Machine intelligence will surpass human intelligence, within a few decades.

#34

Post by yters »

bluekeybox wrote: post #30
shadowfox wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since you seem to know this stuff, I had a couple of questions. > Not unless you teach it. Humans who grow up in the wild on their own are quite ape-like -- clearly, human brain doesn't start working automatically on its own I find this very interesting. Are there some articles/papers that I can look in to? > also, as demonstrated by machine learning, you can teach a non-biological system just as efficiently as you c…

> Are there some articles/papers that I can look in to? There was little real science done because "real" science is when you do experiments, and a study of this kind would involve the so-called forbidden experiment, which would create a huge ethical stir. The most often-cited report is this one: http://academic.research.microsoft.com/Publication/2053957/g... Here is a brief Powerpoint with an overview of interesting…

The no free lunch theorem has killed all such hopes for me.

Re: Machine intelligence will surpass human intelligence, within a few decades.

#35

Post by yters »

D_Alex wrote: post #17
yters wrote: post #2

By 2026, apparently: "But because we’re doubling the rate of progress every decade, we’ll see a century of progress–at today’s rate–in only 25 calendar years." "In line with my earlier predictions, supercomputers will achieve one human brain capacity by 2010, and personal computers will do so by around 2020. By 2030, it will take a village of human brains (around a thousand) to match $1000 of computing." So, have sup…

Estimates of the computing power of human brain vary widely, the ones that have some logic behind them range from 0.1 to 1000 petaflops. IMHO, they tend to be very "pro-brain", and should be seen as an upper limit. Currently, the fastest supercomputer does abt 8 petaflops. This might be already 80 times more than the power of a human brain. And it could be less.. but where is your 10^10 factor from?

Ah, whoops, I took his human race number. n/m, seems we're on track for computational performance, or even ahead of schedule.

Sweet, I should start seeing human type sentience any day now!

Re: Machine intelligence will surpass human intelligence, within a few decades.

#36

Post by yters »

tree_of_item wrote: post #6
yters wrote: post #2

By 2026, apparently: "But because we’re doubling the rate of progress every decade, we’ll see a century of progress–at today’s rate–in only 25 calendar years." "In line with my earlier predictions, supercomputers will achieve one human brain capacity by 2010, and personal computers will do so by around 2020. By 2030, it will take a village of human brains (around a thousand) to match $1000 of computing." So, have sup…

What? What about it is "logically impossible"? I really doubt you have a proof that it is impossible, so why the appeal to "logic"?

If we are intelligent agents per Dembski's description of intelligence, then there is a logical proof that we cannot be artificial intelligences.

Re: Machine intelligence will surpass human intelligence, within a few decades.

#37

Post by yters »

hugh3 wrote: post #21
waqf wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The following two statements are not incompossible: 1. At each time T, we believe that "machine intelligence", according to the definition in use at time T, is a few decades away; 2. At each time T, we're right. In other words, the fact that in thirty years we'll still be talking about how we'll have machine intelligence one day, has nothing to do with the fact that by that point we'll already have machine intelligen…

The following two statements are not incompossible: 1. At each time T, we believe that "machine intelligence", according to the definition in use at time T, is a few decades away; 2. At each time T, we're right. They're not incompatible, but the second one isn't true. It's true that a few decades ago some folks thought that a computer capable of playing good chess would be true "machine intelligence". But they also t…

Supposedly the human brain is only on the order of petaflops, so we should be able to simulate it at this point.

Re: Machine intelligence will surpass human intelligence, within a few decades.

#38

Post by bluekeybox »

yters wrote: post #34
bluekeybox wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are there some articles/papers that I can look in to? There was little real science done because "real" science is when you do experiments, and a study of this kind would involve the so-called forbidden experiment, which would create a huge ethical stir. The most often-cited report is this one: http://academic.research.microsoft.com/Publication/2053957/g... Here is a brief Powerpoint with an overview of interesting…

The no free lunch theorem has killed all such hopes for me.

Don't see an argument here. One could also use your theorem to arrive to the exactly opposite conclusion: AI will happen and will eat your lunch, therefore there will be no free lunch.

Re: Machine intelligence will surpass human intelligence, within a few decades.

#39

Post by yters »

bluekeybox wrote: post #38
yters wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The no free lunch theorem has killed all such hopes for me.

Don't see an argument here. One could also use your theorem to arrive to the exactly opposite conclusion: AI will happen and will eat your lunch, therefore there will be no free lunch.

Perhaps you are unaware of this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_free_lunch_theorem

Re: Machine intelligence will surpass human intelligence, within a few decades.

#40

Post by tree_of_item »

yters wrote: post #36
tree_of_item wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? What about it is "logically impossible"? I really doubt you have a proof that it is impossible, so why the appeal to "logic"?

If we are intelligent agents per Dembski's description of intelligence, then there is a logical proof that we cannot be artificial intelligences.

I don't think that's a sensible claim at all. "Proof that humans are not artificial intelligences" doesn't even seem to be a coherent idea.

I'm going to go ahead and assume you've misunderstood what this person was talking about, as the alternative is to say that you're sitting on proof of the impossibility of a very quickly moving field with extremely deep implications for the future of humanity, and I've never once heard of it.

Unless you'd like to explain it :)

Post reply on HN