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

Physicist proposes new way to think about intelligence

insidescience.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 145 posts

Re: Physicist proposes new way to think about intelligence

#31

Post by snowwrestler »

pjscott wrote: post #13
IsaacL wrote: post #6

Very interesting. The big idea, as I see it, is that intelligent systems try to maintain as many possible futures as they can - to keep their options open. People often think that all living beings are driven by the need to reproduce, but the need to survive - to maintain homeostasis, to keep one's shape in a complex environment - is even more fundamental, I think. If you extend the idea of living beings attempting t…

The need to reproduce is more fundamental, and there are plenty of examples in nature of animals sacrificing homeostasis in order to reproduce -- male black widow spiders, for example. It's obvious why this would be the case; that's how evolution works. Keeping your future options open is a nice heuristic, but it's not necessarily an end goal.

Reproducing captures more future states than not reproducing, since it allows some of your collected information to extend past your death.

Re: Physicist proposes new way to think about intelligence

#32

Post by snowwrestler »

This is interesting because it connects intelligence directly to the concept of life as a locally anti-entropic system (gravity can break an egg, but only a chicken can make a new egg). It implies that intelligence is an aspect of all life, which fits the latest research into animal behavior and intelligence.

Re: Physicist proposes new way to think about intelligence

#33

Post by dsowers »

patcon wrote: post #23
technotony wrote: post #7

This is fascinating. It proposes that intelligence is about maximizing the control we have over future events, ie maximize the entropy of the system. Intuitively this aligns well with how I think about many strategic options or inflections in life/business - you try to take the path which maximizes future options. Lots of interesting applications, will be interested to see how well they manage to communicate this wor…

I think it's about trying to minimize entropy (disorder) of the system. Maximum entropy is maximum disorder (which the universe tends toward naturally), such as when the pendulum hangs below the cart without any intervention.

Yeah, I had to parse the article a couple times because the wording is wrong. It seems to me that entropica is trying to minimize the entropy of the system. Life is all about low entropy.

Re: Physicist proposes new way to think about intelligence

#34

Post by cscurmudgeon »

Steuard wrote: post #27

I haven't read the original paper, but (speaking as a physicist) I'm always skeptical when physicists leap into extremely different disciplines and claim to have a grand insight that its specialists have never considered before. It could always be true: physics really does have a lot to contribute in many areas! But the burden of proof is very, very much on the physicists to justify the relevance of their approach. I…

Welcome to modern physics, where physicists do unfalsifiable and imprecise things based on bad philosophy. Anything goes as long as it gets you attention anywhere.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5562156

HNers need to more critical of Science articles. This is where we need good criticism not on some poor hacker's pet project.

Edit 1

"Additionally, a company he founded is exploring commercial applications of the research in areas such as robotics, economics and defense."

That is a major red flag when people posit a universal AI theory and try to sell to the hapless government tech based on it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking_Machines_Corporation

Re: Physicist proposes new way to think about intelligence

#35

Post by pitchups »

conroe64 wrote: post #5

http://www.entropica.com/ has a very nice, short, video demonstrating the AI.

Completely blown away after watching that video by the sheer range of tasks this AI can accomplish on its own. Learning to walk, balance a stick, using tools, co-operating, playing pong, and...even buying stocks low and selling high! And all of this without being programmed or given a goal to do so. If true this could be a huge breakthrough indeed. Would really like to learn more about the core technology and will be following this more closely.

Re: Physicist proposes new way to think about intelligence

#36

Post by coldtea »

Steuard wrote: post #27

I haven't read the original paper, but (speaking as a physicist) I'm always skeptical when physicists leap into extremely different disciplines and claim to have a grand insight that its specialists have never considered before. It could always be true: physics really does have a lot to contribute in many areas! But the burden of proof is very, very much on the physicists to justify the relevance of their approach. I…

>I haven't read the original paper, but (speaking as a physicist) I'm always skeptical when physicists leap into extremely different disciplines and claim to have a grand insight that its specialists have never considered before.

That's bad, because the most interesting breakthroughs came from cross-disciplinary work.

Re: Physicist proposes new way to think about intelligence

#37

Post by ozankabak »

altrego99 wrote: post #30

> Allowing the rod to fall will _lower_ the entropy of the system??

Yes. I don't know the exact dynamics of their toy problem, but thinking about it this way can help: When the rod falls over, it will stay there from then on. In terms of the number of possible future states, there are less possibilities for the system.

Re: Physicist proposes new way to think about intelligence

#38

Post by wavesounds »

Steuard wrote: post #27

I haven't read the original paper, but (speaking as a physicist) I'm always skeptical when physicists leap into extremely different disciplines and claim to have a grand insight that its specialists have never considered before. It could always be true: physics really does have a lot to contribute in many areas! But the burden of proof is very, very much on the physicists to justify the relevance of their approach. I…

Agreed

"My proposal is that intelligence is a process that attempts to capture future histories"

'future histories' is just ... the future! .... so his great proposal is 'intelligence predicts the future'? Well duh!

Re: Physicist proposes new way to think about intelligence

#39

Post by jinfiesto »

wavesounds wrote: post #38
Steuard wrote: post #27

I haven't read the original paper, but (speaking as a physicist) I'm always skeptical when physicists leap into extremely different disciplines and claim to have a grand insight that its specialists have never considered before. It could always be true: physics really does have a lot to contribute in many areas! But the burden of proof is very, very much on the physicists to justify the relevance of their approach. I…

Agreed "My proposal is that intelligence is a process that attempts to capture future histories" 'future histories' is just ... the future! .... so his great proposal is 'intelligence predicts the future'? Well duh!

Errr no. His proposal is that intelligence is a process that maximizes the number of available future histories. Just capturing future histories is meaningless. The example he gives of an upright rod clearly illustrates the difference. Really what he's saying is that intelligence seeks to maintain maximum possibilities for the future.

Re: Physicist proposes new way to think about intelligence

#40

Post by dmix »

guylhem wrote: post #19
scythe wrote: post #10

I'm surprised they got through the whole article without mentioning Nietzsche's der Wille zur Macht (will to power), which seems to be qualitatively identical (or at least very similar) to this proposal. Not bad for a philosopher from the 1800s.

It seems to me that Nietzsche work is frequently discussed yet rarely read. I read Zarathustra with a goal of non casual reading - it took me 6 months, due to what is IMHO the complexity of the issues discussed. One has to frequently stop at every paragraph to ponder whether one's understanding is correct, and how it articulates with the other paragraphs. If on average, it takes more time indeed to read Nietzsche tha…

> One has to frequently stop at every paragraph to ponder whether one's understanding is correct, and how it articulates with the other paragraphs.

Which is interesting, because Nietzsche is generally seen as one of the more accessible of the philosophers from around that period.

I highly recommend reading Arthur Schopenhauer's work as well which heavily influenced Nietzsche. It predates Nietzsche's work by about 30yrs but it is very similar (although much more nihilistic).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Schopenhauer

Post reply on HN