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

Video games are essential for inventing artificial intelligence

togelius.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 133 posts

Re: Video games are essential for inventing artificial intelligence

#121

Post by drdeca »

mankash666 wrote: post #118
drdeca wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could they perhaps be trying to understand the reasoning behind your complaint?

But my reasoning is spelt out clearly in my first post- I find the opening statement of the article to be a frivolous hyperbole in a world facing cancer, global warming, hunger, poverty, antibiotic resistant infections....

The part they might have been trying to understand is how that specifically fits in with the complaint about the line being unscientific.

I certainly do disagree with the line you quoted and complained of ("complained" here used in a neutral sense). I don't think humanity will ever invent true AGI. (I think attempting it may be worthwhile, but I don't think it is likely to succeed, and I certainly don't think it is of prime importance).

The thing that might not be understood is why you (seem to?) think it is inappropriate (not forbidden, just not-worth-your-time or whatever judgement you made of it) for an article to have both opinion based non-empirical statements, as well as other more technical statements, or something like that.

I'm not sure that the article purported to be a scientific article in the sense that you meant, nor do I think that the submitter claimed it was.

I don't at all mean to suggest that you are incorrect for disliking the first sentence enough to not read the rest of the article. I think that's reasonable. However, I don't really understand the complaint being on the basis of it conflicting with the blog post being a "scientific article".

I agree that its good for there to be things which just document things without including things like the first sentence there, but I think its also good for there to be things which also do have things like the first sentence there.

I can think of a number of other complaints about that sentence that make a fair bit of sense to me, but I don't /really/ understand the reasoning behind yours.

If this was like, a news article or something, I would agree more I think, but seeing as it seems to just be someone's personal blog, I don't see why I would expect[1] an entirely detached and objective view from it, instead of a mix of personal viewpoints along with statements of fact (though, I would expect/hope that the viewpoints and the facts not be conflated).

[1]expect in the approval sense, not in the prediction sense.

sorry this post is long I'm often not good with being concise

Re: Video games are essential for inventing artificial intelligence

#122

Post by mankash666 »

drdeca wrote: post #121
mankash666 wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But my reasoning is spelt out clearly in my first post- I find the opening statement of the article to be a frivolous hyperbole in a world facing cancer, global warming, hunger, poverty, antibiotic resistant infections....

The part they might have been trying to understand is how that specifically fits in with the complaint about the line being unscientific. I certainly do disagree with the line you quoted and complained of ("complained" here used in a neutral sense). I don't think humanity will ever invent true AGI. (I think attempting it may be worthwhile, but I don't think it is likely to succeed, and I certainly don't think it is o…

It boils down to personal preference I suppose. I'm used to the tech press mixing opinions & facts, and probably unreasonably expect actual practitioners/inventots of tech to omit opinions, especially omniscient, overarching, grand opinions.

Re: Video games are essential for inventing artificial intelligence

#123

Post by niels_olson »

Joof wrote: post #50
niels_olson wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, this is a bit like saying we don't need to go to Mars because we should solve poverty first. Solving the problems of going to Mars will solve a lot of other problems and create a lot of industries along the way. Solving AI will solve a lot of other problems and create a lot of industries along the way. A great deal of poverty is a mismatch between bodies and skills needed in the workforce. We haven't needed dit…

Poverty is a fun issue because (typically) solving poverty has resulted in greater population and thus trends towards poverty. Less true in modern nations, but its still generally true.

I recall Bill Gates saying his foundation did a study that found that given a certain level of resource security, most families stop reproducing after 2 offspring. The study population was in sub-Saharan Africa.

Re: Video games are essential for inventing artificial intelligence

#124

Post by niels_olson »

Houshalter wrote: post #81
niels_olson wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, this is a bit like saying we don't need to go to Mars because we should solve poverty first. Solving the problems of going to Mars will solve a lot of other problems and create a lot of industries along the way. Solving AI will solve a lot of other problems and create a lot of industries along the way. A great deal of poverty is a mismatch between bodies and skills needed in the workforce. We haven't needed dit…

This is the broken window fallacy. The idea that creating jobs in and of themselves is a good thing. Going to mars creates jobs, so it must be good. Not considering the opportunity cost of all the other ways those resources could be spent. You use the example of ditch diggers, but that's actually quite a famous example to demonstrate this point. Milton Friedman was in another country where they were having workers di…

> This is the broken window fallacy. The idea that creating jobs in and of themselves is a good thing.

Well, insofar as human happiness is somewhat intermingled with a sense of purpose in life, yes, jobs are a good thing. But that doesn't mean society owes everyone a job. That would actually remove the happiness utility of the function.

> Going to mars creates jobs, so it must be good. Not considering the opportunity cost of all the other ways those resources could be spent.

Um, the investment in Mars to date is substantially less than the investment in poverty. If you consider the military as a jobs program, or public infrastructure construction as a jobs program, then we spend a ton of money on poverty.

> You use the example of ditch diggers ... spoons.

Are you countering my example by extending it?

> AI won't even create jobs. If anything it will take more of them and increase poverty.

Sure it will, but they'll require more education, hence my recommendation: stay in school.

> The benefit of AI is that it can create more wealth than it takes away. AI would be incredibly useful, and so many things could be automated or improved. If the AI is much smarter than us, it could even advance science and engineer things we couldn't dream of.

I think a lot of people probably agree with you, but I wouldn't get too excited quite yet.

Re: Video games are essential for inventing artificial intelligence

#125

Post by onetimePete »

ph0rque wrote: post #119
nekopa wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what about disk corruption?

The AI would invent a non-corruptible disk, obviously.

I wonder, if you fear the headcrash- feal the failability of the mortal flash- could you get religious. Believe in reincarnation as a backup if you have been exponential enough?

Re: Video games are essential for inventing artificial intelligence

#126

Post by qbrass »

m_mueller wrote: post #113
cmarschner wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A kid's emotions are actually tightly linked to cost (or rather: fitness) functions: it gets fascinated by things it just barely cannot do. Somehow it "knows" that it could learn it and gets drawn to it. It gets bored by things it can do already, and frustrated by matters that are too hard. I think there's a pattern - emotions are a device for steering the system as a whole in a certain direction that increases its (…

To me this model feels a bit too simplistic. If you only look at how children learn their abilities, then yes, absolutely. Where it breaks down for me is in the interaction with play partners. The joy he seems to get for playing together doesn't seem to be fully explainable through pure evolutionary steering / fitness functions, but it's hard to put my finger on what's missing in the picture. An example is his joyful…

Unknown things are to be avoided, until feedback shows that there's no threat, which makes aversion costly. Then simple observing is the lowest cost option until there's fewer novelties. The extra energy expended from interaction is then offset by the gains in feedback. Eventually even that peters out and finding something else to do makes more sense.

Re: Video games are essential for inventing artificial intelligence

#127

Post by JoshTriplett »

m_mueller wrote: post #114
JoshTriplett wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Recently having become a father has made me think a lot about general intelligence. [...] why don't we try modelling emotions as the basic building blocks that drive the AI forward Because, among many other reasons, an AI going through the "terrible two(minute)s" could decide to destroy the world, or simply do so by accident. We will have a hard enough time building AI that doesn't do that when we set that specific…

There are multiple factions when it comes to AI, and both positions don't seem to be disprovable to me, i.e. whether AI will safe us or be our doom. On the opposite spectrum I'd put David Deutsch[1]. My position is that if such a singularity is possible, we probably can't avoid it, but it's probably possible to nugde it into a good direction by being careful during research. According to Deutsch, the problem of keepi…

> whether AI will safe us or be our doom.

I'd argue that if possible, it has great potential for both: AI provides one of the most universal solutions to a wide range of problems humanity faces, while simultaneously providing an existential threat of its own if it goes badly.

Re: Video games are essential for inventing artificial intelligence

#128

Post by Houshalter »

mankash666 wrote: post #117
Houshalter wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because your complaints about the article make no sense. The article neither claims to be an academic paper, nor is there anything particularly wrong with it. You even admit you didn't read it so why are you writing comments complaining about it?

I'm entitled to my opinion just like you're entitled to yours, and my opinion happens to be negative, the reason for which is spelt out clearly in my opening salvo. I'm stunned that you think your point of view is somehow the only one. Why are you quelling criticism?

I'm not "quelling criticism", I'm saying that you are wrong. And rude for insulting OP.

Re: Video games are essential for inventing artificial intelligence

#129

Post by Houshalter »

niels_olson wrote: post #124
Houshalter wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the broken window fallacy. The idea that creating jobs in and of themselves is a good thing. Going to mars creates jobs, so it must be good. Not considering the opportunity cost of all the other ways those resources could be spent. You use the example of ditch diggers, but that's actually quite a famous example to demonstrate this point. Milton Friedman was in another country where they were having workers di…

> This is the broken window fallacy. The idea that creating jobs in and of themselves is a good thing. Well, insofar as human happiness is somewhat intermingled with a sense of purpose in life, yes, jobs are a good thing. But that doesn't mean society owes everyone a job. That would actually remove the happiness utility of the function. > Going to mars creates jobs, so it must be good. Not considering the opportunity…

>insofar as human happiness is somewhat intermingled with a sense of purpose in life, yes, jobs are a good thing.

Well there might be some truth to that, but the main reason people work is to get money. Its entirely possible we could support poor people without creating meaningless jobs. Typically that actually costs more than just distributing the money directly.

>Um, the investment in Mars to date is substantially less than the investment in poverty. If you consider the military as a jobs program, or public infrastructure construction as a jobs program, then we spend a ton of money on poverty.

I don't know what your point is. No I don't consider those jobs programs, and even if they were what does it matter? And no we haven't spent that much money on going to mars yet.

>Are you countering my example by extending it?

Yes, to show the absurdity of it. Obviously a bunch of people digging with spoons is ridiculous.

Re: Video games are essential for inventing artificial intelligence

#130

Post by jodrellblank »

animal531 wrote: post #110
jodrellblank wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After all, smart humans are generally kind. ?? Smart humans drive cars which splat thousands of insects on their windshields. Smart humans buy clothes imported from third world child working sweatshops, and food from slaughtered pigs and cows and chickens farmed in unpleasant conditions. Smart humans flush their excrement into the rivers they take drinking water from, and the oceans they fish food from, the same plac…

I agree with true AI possibly being extremely non-human, but according to your examples that could be its most important feature. Us humans don't have the mental capacity to link child sweatshops to our limited world view, but an AI might, exactly because it's not limited by biology. And even that also depends on upbringing. Our super intelligent spider who's been raised well (and associates with humans) should be fr…

You're arguing that it will act like us because it will be intelligent.

That doesn't hold. Dogs have millions of years of evolution of being pack mammals with leaders, spiders don't.

We are superintelligent compared to spiders, we don't care about what spiders care about just because we grow up with spiders nearby. We still kill them, wreck their habitats, and ignore them.

We don't exploit them. They're too irrelevant to be exploitable. We bulldoze them away and put buildings millions of times bigger than them on top.

A superintelligence which is amoral won't care about us just from being near us, like we don't care about wrapping wasps in silk just from being near spiders. We can't associate with spiders, an AI won't automatically be able, willing or interested in associating with us - unless we code that in. It won't exploit us, it will go about its goals without considering us as anything special or interesting.

Post reply on HN