Just A New Fractal Detail In The Big Picture (2015)
1–10 of 180 posts
Re: Just A New Fractal Detail In The Big Picture (2015)
#2Echoes of 'I, Pencil' in there:
http://www.econlib.org/library/Essays/rdPncl1.html
Some more background about the brain shrinkage referred to in the article:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-have-our-brain...
Re: Just A New Fractal Detail In The Big Picture (2015)
#3I think the article is missing the point of what AI will do by eliminating jobs like transportation and fast food preparation . I think once we get to that point we will have to implement basic income .
Re: Just A New Fractal Detail In The Big Picture (2015)
#4I think the article is missing the point of what AI will do by eliminating jobs like transportation and fast food preparation . I think once we get to that point we will have to implement basic income .
Re: Just A New Fractal Detail In The Big Picture (2015)
#5I think the article is missing the point of what AI will do by eliminating jobs like transportation and fast food preparation . I think once we get to that point we will have to implement basic income .
AI and basic income in the same comment. I almost forgot I was on HN for a second there.
Re: Just A New Fractal Detail In The Big Picture (2015)
#6I think the article is missing the point of what AI will do by eliminating jobs like transportation and fast food preparation . I think once we get to that point we will have to implement basic income .
AI and basic income in the same comment. I almost forgot I was on HN for a second there.
A Haskell mention would've completed the HN trifecta.
Re: Just A New Fractal Detail In The Big Picture (2015)
#7I think the article is missing the point of what AI will do by eliminating jobs like transportation and fast food preparation . I think once we get to that point we will have to implement basic income .
AI and basic income in the same comment. I almost forgot I was on HN for a second there.
Classic HN: Trying to capture the depth of topics like Basic Income and AI by sprinkling them over two sentences.
Kidding :)
Re: Just A New Fractal Detail In The Big Picture (2015)
#8This is closely related to the economic concept of the "Invisible Hand"[0] and also explains why planned economies never seem to work, no matter how well-intentioned they are (see the current state of Venezuela - although in their case, as in almost every case of central planned economies, greed and corruption were the prevailing forces of the ruling agency)
Re: Just A New Fractal Detail In The Big Picture (2015)
#9While taking neuroscience it occurred to me that one could make an argument - depending on what one wants to show, the usefulness of a model is always limited by the intended use - to see a similarity between neurons and humans: The system outcome is not the sum of what each neuron "knows", and each neuron is really "ignorant" and "stupid".
For example, why are people bothered that there are people who are into conspiracy theories? Or some who see dangers everywhere, while for others everything (everyone) is good? Maybe that's their role in the "humanity computer"! Some neurons' (humans') task is to be extra-paranoid so that the majority don't have to. and others are the opposite, nothing bothers them. What seems "crazy" is, when looked at from a higher plane, quite possibly a very reasonable organisation. Maybe "humanity" does not - should not - make sense on an individual level (i.e. ever single human be "sensible", "reasonable"), but on the level of "humanity". Why this obsession that everybody has to agree, and people who don't are vilified? If all neurons in the brain were to agree you'd have a very dysfunctional brain. What it needs are complex connections and (feedback) loops that enhance and suppress output depending on the overall input. "Overall" is important - not "what an individual (human or neuron) sees", but the sum of all inputs into the system. It does not have to make sense on an individual level.
I like how Sherlock Holmes says it (short, 30 seconds): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuIMmwJbnco
The attempt to understand "humanity" and what's going on on this planet on an individual human level is doomed to fail. The most you can get is a "feeling" that you get it -but if you do, it's wrong, and it's really bad. If you also happen to have some "power" (individuals having too much power is a bad construct) the outcome can be disastrous.
The things the linked article talked about I use to mention in the context of "magic". You know, what the fantasy books and movies are all about. They have "magic items" - whose main property is that nobody knows what they actually are or how they work, where they come from. Sounds familiar? I don't even have to look at an iphone.
This wonderful story sums it up very well I think (and please ignore the object that it uses, here "Coke", it's not about Coke, so no need to discuss the merits of overpriced unhealthy sugar-water): https://medium.com/@kevin_ashton/what-coke-contains-221d4499...
Quote:
> The number of individuals who know how to make a can of Coke is zero. The number of individual nations that could produce a can of Coke is zero. This famously American product is not American at all. Invention and creation is something we are all in together. Modern tool chains are so long and complex that they bind us into one people and one planet. They are not only chains of tools, they are also chains of minds: local and foreign, ancient and modern, living and dead — the result of disparate invention and intelligence distributed over time and space.
And look, I don't even have to explain my thoughts myself! Which, if I had been born in the forest away from thousands of years of human experience and exchange with other humans in time and space, I would probably never have developed in the first place. Instead I can go and use a few words of "glue" to link to pieces written by others - that they themselves owe to others.
Think about that in the next discussion about high-earning people "they earn it"! Do they? Back to the example "born alone on the forest". If someone develops a Facebook or a Tesla or a Dell computer from such roots, then I agree, they deserve billions. For clarification: I'm not talking about the 1%, I'm talking about the 0.01% (The Economist: http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21631129...; Some charts in a short video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnijnsM)
Re: Just A New Fractal Detail In The Big Picture (2015)
#10I don't see the correlation. The author is talking more about systems. The difference with AI is that it will have all of the knowledge within a system and thus be able to make incredible connections between disparate fields of knowledge.
On a separate note, I had an interesting thought about AI as I was looking at a cool architectural photo. I would love to design a building, but I don't know a thing about it. It would take me years just to learn all the details. Then, I thought, one use of AI may be to connect with our brains and make learning easier. Imagine if we could instantly learn all the fundamentals of architecture, then use our creativity to create our own designs. It's a mix of AI and human creativity, neither one replaces the other.