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

Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence

vatican.va

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 513 posts

Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence

#111

Post by throw0101c »

fakedang wrote: post #73
keiferski wrote: post #24

This might seem unique or unusual, but technology has been intertwined with religion since well, forever, especially if we consider the book to be a form of technology. Personally one of my favorite historical topics is how the printing press had a huge impact on the Reformation. With the Internet more broadly I think we are in the midst of a second “Reformation” in terms of information sources, the media, etc. Anoth…

Technology works well for decentralized religions, like Protestantism and Judaism, where there is no overarching authority on scripture, or where there are multiple entities competing for believers' attention that the majority choose to focus on scientific dogma instead. Once there's a central authority at risk from technology eroding at their base, they will be undermined. Like Catholicism, Islam, the Orthodox Churc…

> […] Like Catholicism […] Interestingly all 3 of the above examples maintain strict conditions that their respective holy books must not be translated into the local languages.

Strange then that the Pope asked someone to translate the Christian Bible—originally written in Koine Greek—into Latin, the lingua franca of the Western Mediterranean:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgate

Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence

#112

Post by bilbo0s »

bbqfog wrote: post #85
vindex10 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 73. However, if AI is used not to enhance but to replace the relationship between patients and healthcare providers—leaving patients to interact with a machine rather than a human being—it would reduce a crucially important human relational structure to a centralized, impersonal, and unequal framework. Instead of encouraging solidarity with the sick and suffering, such applications of AI would risk worsening the lo…

I actually would rather interact with a "robot" doctor. Most doctors I've dealt with have been snide, judgmental, rushed and arrogant. I actually don't feel like I'm getting the best treatment possible, but I would trust AI to not have prejudices or meta-influences (like being "proud" to be an upper class doctor).

Yeah, but that goes into the realm of personal preference right?

I suspect if you're giving people a choice in the future, they're going to flock to the human doctors. Especially human doctors receiving good recommendations.

There has to be something more than personal preference if you want to sway the masses on AI physicians. There has to be some way to measure outcomes in a valid, verifiable and public fashion. Even then, some human doctors will do worse than AIs, and some will do better. And again, at that point, you can expect people, given a choice, to flock to those humans who did better.

We'd need to get to the point where AIs do consistently better than, say, 60 to 70% of the human doctors for insurance companies to feel even semi-comfortable saying "we use AI doctors". An even higher percentage would be necessary for an insurance company to feel comfortable mandating AI doctors. And we'd need AIs to do consistently better than nearly all the humans for humans to choose AI doctors independently of their insurers forcing them to use AI doctors.

Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence

#113

Post by soulofmischief »

belter wrote: post #86
soulofmischief wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd might like 17776 if you haven't already read it! https://www.sbnation.com/a/17776-football

Thanks to you and @superturkey650 for the suggestions. I will check it out. The Rocinante is rebuilding the quantum cores, and is a long process. I have a few hours to kill...

Now that is a great series. :)

Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence

#114

Post by SkyBelow »

Edman274 wrote: post #38
topherjaynes wrote: post #2

[flagged]

Why would you even bother reading the summary if you don't care enough about the contents to actually engage with it meaningfully? It's 13,000 words. It's 52 pages of a Harry Potter novel, and you used to be able to devour those. If you believe that AI is as transformative as a lot of people here seem to think it is, maybe it is worth mulling over and digesting the public statement put out by the single largest organ…

52 pages is a bit of an investment to pick up and read a random item, and I suspect the reading speed will be much lower than a fictional novel given the different density of the material. Think of it like an abstract for a research paper, a short 1 or 2 paragraphs of information to see if you want to dive deeper or not, though it is subpar to an actual abstract if one exists as it is more likely to misrepresent the content.

(One can argue that it appearing on HN, the votes it gets, and the comments it gets work as strong signals meaning it is unfair to consider it any random writeup, but I think the point stands in the more general case when HN isn't providing signaling.)

Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence

#115

Post by lokimedes »

p2detar wrote: post #99
lokimedes wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My own reflection on this idolatry has been along the lines of how readily some people are at negating their own and humanity in general’s fundamental agency. Having AGI, SAI, etc. is completely meaningless if we as our own agents are not there to value it. In a sense, people preaching the coming dominance of AI are suicidal or homicidal, since they are pursuing their own demise by technical means.

> In a sense, people preaching the coming dominance of AI are suicidal or homicidal, since they are pursuing their own demise by technical means. Nope, that is an unsubstantial argument. Geoffrey Hinton, the „God father of AI“ is neither suicidal, nor homicidal.

He is also not cheering its “coming” but worried about the misuse of its power. You can say the same thing about other powerful inventions and their inventors.

Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence

#116

Post by thrance »

carlosjobim wrote: post #108
thrance wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Singularitarianism [1] is a very real phenomenon, if a bit niche. I have seen some people online put genuine faith in AGI existing soon and solving essentially everything that is wrong on Earth and in their lives. I don't think this is harmful because it may be "idolatry", but rather because, like real religion, it is often a substitute for actually improving one's situation or fighting for a better world. The idea o…

> it is often a substitute for actually improving one's situation or fighting for a better world. You just defined idolatry and why it is harmful. Idolatry is the worship of man-made things or other things that do not deserve worship. Including worshipping the government, which is the religion of most people. It is a false path.

Idolatry, as used by christians, naturally excludes their God from its definition. To me who doesn't believe in their God, there isn't much difference in finding solace in the christian God or in the coming of AGI. This is why I don't think Singularitarianism is bad because it is christian idolatry, but because it is a religious belief.

Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence

#117

Post by carlosjobim »

chrsw wrote: post #98

Does this mean that in the eyes of this Pope or this church, natural born biological humans will always be closer to God or have a higher degree of sanctity than artificial intelligence, any form of technological machine, and presumably artificial "life"?

Artificial intelligence has no degree of sanctity at all, because it is dead matter. You have already been confused.

Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence

#118

Post by topherjaynes »

Edman274 wrote: post #38
topherjaynes wrote: post #2

[flagged]

Why would you even bother reading the summary if you don't care enough about the contents to actually engage with it meaningfully? It's 13,000 words. It's 52 pages of a Harry Potter novel, and you used to be able to devour those. If you believe that AI is as transformative as a lot of people here seem to think it is, maybe it is worth mulling over and digesting the public statement put out by the single largest organ…

I get your point, but also 1) It helps me focus on the themes first, like scanning a good non-fiction book to know what I am diving into 2) I'm not catholic, but would love some context going in on it. 3) It's a lot of individual blocks and I'd like to know does that mean they're leary, pro, what are the guidelines so helping find the themes or key topics like is there a benefit to AI and maybe using it to summarize and getting to this parapgrah quickly: 0. In light of the foregoing discussion, the differences between human intelligence and current AI systems become evident. While AI is an extraordinary technological achievement capable of imitating certain outputs associated with human intelligence, it operates by performing tasks, achieving goals, or making decisions based on quantitative data and computational logic. For example, with its analytical power, AI excels at integrating data from a variety of fields, modeling complex systems, and fostering interdisciplinary connections. In this way, it can help experts collaborate in solving complex problems that “cannot be dealt with from a single perspective or from a single set of interests.”[64]

Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence

#120

Post by vindex10 »

bbqfog wrote: post #85
vindex10 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 73. However, if AI is used not to enhance but to replace the relationship between patients and healthcare providers—leaving patients to interact with a machine rather than a human being—it would reduce a crucially important human relational structure to a centralized, impersonal, and unequal framework. Instead of encouraging solidarity with the sick and suffering, such applications of AI would risk worsening the lo…

I actually would rather interact with a "robot" doctor. Most doctors I've dealt with have been snide, judgmental, rushed and arrogant. I actually don't feel like I'm getting the best treatment possible, but I would trust AI to not have prejudices or meta-influences (like being "proud" to be an upper class doctor).

I can understand this sentiment as well.

On one hand I'm a bit hesitant trusting a GP because of a human factor. Doctors may be overwhelmed with patients and your fate kind of depends on their mood today and General Proficiency (couldn't miss this pun).

On the other hand, I feel scared about perspective talking to a chat bot instead of a real person when it comes to my health.

I think, my best bet would be to keep physical GPs but build some tools to make their job more efficient. How to avoid the situation that they are getting lazy and blindly accepting all the AI proposals? I don't know. I hope we will find the way!

Post reply on HN