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

341–350 of 513 posts

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

#341

Post by hnthrow90348765 »

linguistbreaker wrote: post #128
simonw wrote: post #19

I enjoyed this bit - great use of the word "idolatry": ---- 104. Technology offers remarkable tools to oversee and develop the world's resources. However, in some cases, humanity is increasingly ceding control of these resources to machines. Within some circles of scientists and futurists, there is optimism about the potential of artificial general intelligence (AGI), a hypothetical form of AI that would match or sur…

While I agree with the thrust against deification and idolatry - these characterizations border on naive and myopic: "remember that AI is but a pale reflection of humanity" and "AI cannot possess many of the capabilities specific to human life" We just don't know yet. The philosophical and spiritual questions at hand should be asked for a future, hypothetical super-intelligence and the above characterizations lack im…

Probably makes sense to not comment too much on hypotheticals to avoid the "Vatican predicts AI will be sentient" interpretations. I don't see them inaccurate given what we have currently

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

#342

Post by UomoNeroNero »

kittikitti wrote: post #284

I just want to appreciate how well written and thought out this was. I have spent countless hours reading over ethics on AI, especially from Big Tech sources, but this note is leaps beyond. I compare this to the disastrous letter that effectively knee-capped American AI all while proposing flimsy AI ethics within about 500 words ( https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experime... ). This should be anoth…

Mamma mia. Yes, I totally agree with what you wrote: this is a landmark, profound, historic (and very courageous) document.

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

#343

Post by zoogeny »

jajko wrote: post #302
tantaman wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's been around 2000 years with many divisions and sects so I don't think you can give a single definition. Early Christians didn't agree on the divinity of Jesus. Hell wasn't christian doctrine until 400CE. Some Christians believe heaven is on earth itself and you'll be resurrected on earth, in your original body, when that times comes.

When you have 1000 people yelling their own version of truth, the only truth, chance of one of them being actually right is next to zero. Religious folks don't like this type of reasoning, often better without any reasoning at all. I think folks should have stopped with Zoroastrianism, all the monotheistic rest is just layer of sects upon sects upon sects, all coming from roughly same geographical area and all preach…

I disagree on Zoroastrianism, mostly because it sets up a metaphysic where the universe is a perpetual struggle between lightness and darkness (i.e. good and evil). You might associate that concept with many (admittedly popular) Christian sects but it isn't the only interpretation available.

It is totally possible to conceive of a monotheism that isn't based on this kind of eternal conflict.

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

#344

Post by blacksmith_tb »

thomassmith65 wrote: post #254
mattgreenrocks wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I cannot not respond to this comment. Forgive me if I seem short in tone. Maybe we should be helping people develop richer inner lives instead of pouring billions of dollars into something that may or may not pan out in the future. I assert it'd be vastly cheaper, would raise GDP overall, and improve well-being. Where we're at collectively right now is...not great, and I think people correctly perceive that their pro…

My comment actually doesn't say anything positive about the billions of dollars pouring into AI, etc. It's not that humanity has some obligation to create AI. It's that humanity has an obligation not to create an AI whose wellbeing we ignore because it's "not a real person"

I hope so - a moral obligation. It seems interesting that the Vatican didn't really touch on the implication of a truly sentient AI (not that I think we're close to creating one, but it seems possible). I suspect it would pose awkward questions about whether it would then have a soul, could convert, etc. Anyhow it struck me a surprising omission in what is otherwise a thorough and mostly sensible discussion of the pitfalls of the path we're taking.

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

#345

Post by titanomachy »

svieira wrote: post #288
titanomachy wrote: post #224

> the entire human person is simultaneously both material and spiritual... the human person transcends the material world through the soul... the human spirit does not exercise its normal mode of knowledge without the body I have a hard time wrapping my head around exactly what it is that Christians believe about immortality. So the soul lives on forever, but without the reasoning and intellectual capabilities grante…

> So the soul lives on forever, but without the reasoning and intellectual capabilities granted by the corporeal form? :boom: You've found it! The disassociation of soul and body are the problem that pre-Catholic thinkers ran into over and over again. The soul must be immortal, but it relies on the body for the sensory perceptions which enable the first stages of any intellection. So what the heck happens to it after…

If the soul is immortal and carries on to heaven, but doesn't contain your memories, but God copies all of your memories into a new body for you in heaven, then what's the point of even making the distinction between an immortal soul and a mortal body?

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

#346

Post by dang »

cynicalpeace wrote: post #298
dang wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. " https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

"Flamebait is the posting of a provocative or offensive message with the intent of provoking an angry response" [1] There hasn't been an angry response to this comment. In fact, they've been thoughtful, though some have disagreed. I don't see how this is a generic tangent, since this comment directly expands on the post, and provides a Christian apologist viewpoint on artificial intelligence. I politely request you r…

On HN, we don't go by intent (which is unknowable), we go by effects [1]—or rather, by likely effects [2].

The highly likely effect of posting a generic comment accusing other people of "hating on Christianity" is a religious flamewar, and that's what we got, with people accusing each other of not having read things (that was you, actually, more than once), being dicks, believing in leprechauns and orbiting teacups, and so on. This tedious stuff is not what HN is for, and destroys what it is for.

Your comment was certainly a generic tangent, as you changed the topic to the value of Christianity in general which is (1) as generic as it gets and (2) references nothing about the OP except that one point.

[1] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...

[2] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

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

#347

Post by titanomachy »

29athrowaway wrote: post #247
titanomachy wrote: post #224

> the entire human person is simultaneously both material and spiritual... the human person transcends the material world through the soul... the human spirit does not exercise its normal mode of knowledge without the body I have a hard time wrapping my head around exactly what it is that Christians believe about immortality. So the soul lives on forever, but without the reasoning and intellectual capabilities grante…

The immortality of the soul is a Hellenistic belief that influenced Christianity.

I looked this up and it seems you're right that the old testament does not imply eternal conscious life. TIL!

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

#348

Post by radlad »

squigz wrote: post #308
radlad wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sensory input refers to the information received by the body's senses, like sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell, through sensory organs like the eyes, ears, skin, tongue, and nose, which is then transmitted to the brain as electrical signals for processing and interpretation; essentially, it's anything you perceive using your senses. Even if we are talking about the best cameras in the world, they pale in compa…

> Even if we are talking about the best cameras in the world, they pale in comparison to our eyes Wait, what? Can you elaborate on this? That seems... wrong.

Absolutely! It certainly depends on the metrics you care about. If you want to freeze fast motion, a camera is your best bet. But if you want to see high contrast areas (e.g. looking outside a window from a dark room), you've got a HUGE leg up on cameras. For example, high-end cameras tend to feature maybe 15 stops of dynamic range, while humans eyes can manage up to 24 stops (a "stop" is a doubling or halving of light values.)

Additionally, the human eye has a resolution of approximately 576 MP. This is one reason why we can often see details in the distance that disappear in a photo.

Finally, while it's arguably not "better," the brain processes images very differently. This is another reason why the image you take often looks "worse" than what you saw in person, or why you can't get the colors to look "quite right", etc. If you get into photography, you start to "see" the things your eye was previously rewriting for you (like a green color cast on skin when you're in the forest) - but it's not the natural way your brain process information.

You can also look up estimates on the processing rate of human's sensory system - it's quite impressive.

Less related, but things like this are interesting too: https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=17970

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

#349

Post by dang »

bena wrote: post #339
cynicalpeace wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

[flagged]

You've broken the site guidelines repeatedly in this thread by crossing into personal attack, perpetuating a religious flamewar, etc. Can you please not do that, regardless of how provocative some other comments are or you feel they are? It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.

If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

Post reply on HN