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

391–400 of 513 posts

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

#391

Post by pixl97 »

zoogeny wrote: post #334
grahamj wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Books are written by people. It’s humans all the way down.

I think this is a bad direction to argue from. Science is humans all the way down and we want to have confidence in the scientific process. That is, it is fundamental to our understanding of science that we can trust the collective output of numerous humans working together to uncover "Truth". You wouldn't accept the counter argument: "Science is wrong because it is the work of humans; religion is right because it is…

A major problem it seems is that people get caught up and forget that philosophy can exist without religion can just get trapped in the arguments religious philosophy presents.

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

#392

Post by pixl97 »

glenstein wrote: post #100
b450 wrote: post #41

This is a great demonstration of the fact that people coming from very different perspectives can, through good faith inquiry, find much to agree on. I think there are a lot of thoughtful arguments and conclusions in here even though I generally find the catholic church's metaphysical pyrotechnics to be fairly ridiculous. It goes to show that E.O. Wilson's concept of "consilience" can apply even outside of sciences -…

Yeah! Perhaps a bit naively, as a Highly Opinionated Person (HOP) on this topic I was ready for this to have something controversial to say about the nature of intelligence. It's not out of the ordinary for even Anglosphere philosophers to fall into a kind of essentiallism about intelligence, but I think the treatment of it here is extremely careful and thoughtful, at least on first glace. I suppose I would challenge…

>I have heard this claim frequently, that intelligence is "embodied" in a way that computers overlook, but if that turns out to be critical, well, who is to say that something like this "embodied" context can't also be modeled computationally?

Well, Searle argued against it when presenting the case for the Chinese Room argument, but I disagree with their take.

I personally believe in the virtual mind argument with an internal simulated experience that is then acted upon externally.

Moreso, if this is the key to human like intelligence and learning in the real world, I do believe that AI would very quickly pass by our limitations. Humans are not only embodied, but we are prisoners to our embodiment and we only get one. I don't see any particular reason why a model would be trapped to one body, when they could 'hivemind' or control a massive number of bodies/sensors to sense and interact with the environment. The end product would be an experience far different from what a human experiences and would likely be a super organism in itself.

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

#393

Post by pixl97 »

zoogeny wrote: post #379
linguistbreaker wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I think they are fair statements, but perhaps not saying what you think. Plato covers a lot of this kind of thing and it is maybe useful to use his framework (since much of modern Catholicism has a healthy dose of Platonism). Both flowers and music can be called "beautiful" and there is some sense in which both partake in a universal "Beauty". Yet at the same time the nature of the beauty of flowers and music is dist…

>but there may be some aspect of the human manifestation of that form that will forever remain distinct to humans.

Lets not forget the converse may be true for AI. Humans may be a very specialized form of intelligence (though we do like to consider ourselves general intelligences).

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

#394

Post by pixl97 »

bilbo0s wrote: post #72
kouru225 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we have AGI then I doubt that the rich people will be able to control it at all

We already have billions of AGIs running all over the planet. The wealthy seem to do a pretty good job of keeping them all in line. I don't see any reason that would change in the future. If you want something the wealthy can't control, you'll need to look a good deal further afield than AGI. Think gamma ray bursts, asteroid strikes, or solar flares. But anything built by man, they'll have a pretty good grip on.

>But anything built by man, they'll have a pretty good grip on.

I mean one of the points of 'Actual AGI' is AGI will be able to build more AGI, then we're not talking about something built by man.

Now, when will we see that, I'm not making any predictions. At the same time trying to make predictions of a system that could do that is probably much harder still.

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

#396

Post by pixl97 »

Mistletoe wrote: post #52
kouru225 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we have AGI then I doubt that the rich people will be able to control it at all

What will prevent them from literally unplugging it from the wall?

Well, if AI is smart...

It will control the electrical grids with 'smart' decisions that improve the efficiency and make it's removal impossible without taking out all power.

It will integrate with water and waste processing to ensure leaks don't exist in the system and everything is working smoothly.

It will be in all transportation and distribution networks because companies want profits from efficiency before they'll think deeply about the risks.

Then after it's pretty much everywhere ensuring you down starve and dehydrate, who the hell would be dumb enough to unplug it in the first place.

It's kinda like telling people to shut off every computer today, not a chance in hell it would or could happen without terrible life risking consequences.

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

#397

Post by codr7 »

Animats wrote: post #313
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…

It is well thought out. The "AI Magna Carta" is a stretch, though. Some good insights: 60. Anthropomorphizing AI also poses specific challenges for the development of children, potentially encouraging them to develop patterns of interaction that treat human relationships in a transactional manner, as one would relate to a chatbot. Such habits could lead young people to see teachers as mere dispensers of information r…

Children need human attention to thrive.

Classes are WAY too big.

There have been several very successful projects focused on getting adults to do homework with children.

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

#398

Post by codr7 »

Eisenstein wrote: post #300
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…

It is a rehashing of the same stalled philosophical debates that are already tired. They didn't present any scientific evidence for biological necessity for intelligence, nor did they assert their religious authority. It is completely pointless.

You're asking for proof that doesn't exist and using it's absence as proof you're right. Doesn't look very constructive to me.

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

#399

Post by codr7 »

Anon84 wrote: post #275
rotexo wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I recognize that these are articles of deeply-held faith. I am open to the idea of God, I am open to the idea that God is fundamentally mysterious and beyond our mortal understanding. I simply feel that I always have to exercise skepticism regarding the words of religious institutions, though, because it seems to me that power-hungry individuals could use legitimate teachings as a camouflage for their immoral se…

As someone (I forget who), "God is not something you believe in. God is something you experience". In my view, any given religion is just the accumulated ways in which a specific group of people found to handle the aftermath of that experience. Of course, the problem is that you get indoctrinated into a religion before you have a chance to experience It in the first place and end up mistaking the aftermath of the exp…

If established religion actually stuck to the spiritual side of things and stopped fighting for the control of the population, it would definitely be able to do more good.

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

#400

Post by codr7 »

glenstein wrote: post #100
b450 wrote: post #41

This is a great demonstration of the fact that people coming from very different perspectives can, through good faith inquiry, find much to agree on. I think there are a lot of thoughtful arguments and conclusions in here even though I generally find the catholic church's metaphysical pyrotechnics to be fairly ridiculous. It goes to show that E.O. Wilson's concept of "consilience" can apply even outside of sciences -…

Yeah! Perhaps a bit naively, as a Highly Opinionated Person (HOP) on this topic I was ready for this to have something controversial to say about the nature of intelligence. It's not out of the ordinary for even Anglosphere philosophers to fall into a kind of essentiallism about intelligence, but I think the treatment of it here is extremely careful and thoughtful, at least on first glace. I suppose I would challenge…

Experience is biological, analog, computers are digital; that's the core of the problem. It doesn't matter how many samples you take, it's still not the full experience. Witness Vinyl.
Post reply on HN