Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence • Hacker News Board

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

#421

Post by swat535 » Fri, Jan 31, 2025, 4:11 AM UTC

moralestapia wrote: post #173

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 -…

>people coming from very different perspectives Care to elaborate? Which people and which perspectives? It's a bit unclear to me.

I believe parent is referring to the HN crowd's, which interestingly is rather diverse reacting regarding this post (though I could be wrong and they could be referring to the document and its sources).

Either way, I must admit that, as a Catholic I appreciate the great discussion here. There are of course the usual snarky comments you would expect regarding the Church and religion (which is fine by me) but overall it's a well grounded discussion.

I'm personally enjoying reading the thoughtful perspectives of everyone.

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

#422

Post by nyokodo » Fri, Jan 31, 2025, 4:39 AM UTC

nonameiguess wrote: post #405

nyokodo wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How could they know? I can’t speak for any religious leader but in terms of Catholic leadership: because in many matters God spoke through the Prophets and then He came down and told us directly which is preserved in Holy Scripture and Sacred Tradition (2 Thessalonians 2:15-17), and the Holy Spirit guides the Church (John 14:26) and does so through the prime ministerial office of the Pope the successor of Peter (Ma…

Granting it's been 30 years since I've considered myself Catholic, so speaking entirely from the perspective of a non-believer at this point, but to me, the central dilemma is say I buy that we and our universe have a thinking, feeling creator that watches events, possibly intervenes, and actually cares how we behave in a way we can translate into human language and moral directives, given all the thousands upon thou…

> why should I accept what one specific council of European priests 600 years ago or whatever decided is to be considered holy canon?

Well, firstly the canon doesn't just come from the decisions of Europeans and bringing race into it is a non-sequitur. The canon of Scripture comes from the Sacred Tradition, preserved by the Church and lead by the Pope and the Bishops (who FWIW weren't and aren't just white guys), and then sealed by the authority given by Christ to the Pope and the Bishops on issues of faith and morals. The Sacred Tradition and the authority of the Pope and Bishops comes from Christ, so why should you trust the canon of Scripture? Because Jesus Christ is God and you should believe in Him and be apart of His Church because the canon comes from the Church which comes from Christ. If you don't believe in Jesus Christ or that He was God then worrying about the canon of Scripture and trying to criticize medieval ecumenical council decisions is just foolishness.

> But the core dogma of "believe specific claims of fact because they were written down in one text and not another" is bad epistemology

This is closer to Protestant dogma which tends to assert that the Church and all our beliefs come from Scripture. To slightly rephrase and expand on what I already said above, Catholic dogma is that the canon of Scripture comes from the Church not the other way around, that is to say Christ gave us the Sacred Tradition and the Apostles and their successors are what determined the canon of Scripture.

So now I've distilled a vague distrust you have in medieval and ancient sources down to a historical and empirical question. Did Jesus Christ die and rise again, and did He found a Church that has kept his Tradition alive through the centuries and alive fundamentally unchanged. These questions have been ignored and then ridiculed by empiricists but I've noticed more and more people starting to take them seriously, I suggest you do too.

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

#423

Post by rashidae » Fri, Jan 31, 2025, 5:14 AM UTC

philipov wrote: post #418

rashidae wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think centralization is the real threat. As James Currier [1] pointed out, AI will be commoditized through open-source and model convergence, making oligopoly control unlikely. The real challenge is standardizing safety across open models and countering malignant AI use, especially amid demographic challenges like declining fertility. [1] https://x.com/jamescurrier/status/1884057861514485803?s=46&t...

What's the connection between malignant AI use and declining fertility?

AI + VR will most probably create addictive, lifelike experiences that may affect real-world relationships. Like TikTok and Instagram algorithms, this could reduce the desire for intimacy and worsen declining fertility rates.

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

#424

Post by nyokodo » Fri, Jan 31, 2025, 6:29 AM UTC

Juliate wrote: post #419

lolinder wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Whether or not a literal god may have been involved at any point is irrelevant. Right now, we're very far removed from any such claimed involvement, looking at documents that have been written, cherry-picked, translated, rewritten, and reinterpreted many times by many different fallible humans. This is only true from the Protestant Sola Scriptura perspective. The Catholic and Orthodox traditions hold that God still…

This is also true from a Catholic point of view (I am). At the very least, that’s debatable or less absolute than that. Because evidence (schisms, actual errors from the Church institution throughout time, not the least sex scandals we are not done with yet) shows that if God was actively directing the Church in the past and today, oh boy… not sure you would be sane to want to follow such a “peculiar” guidance.

> Because evidence (schisms, actual errors from the Church institution throughout time, not the least sex scandals we are not done with yet) shows that if God was actively directing the Church in the past and today, oh boy…

Except all the scandals and anti-Popes are empirical evidence of the Holy Spirit guiding the Church. Despite all that the teachings of the Church are fundamentally unchanged. I can read St Justin Martyr and recognize the teaching of the Eucharist from the second century that itself is in continuity with John 6. Go through all Catholic teachings and you’ll find continuity from the beginning despite all the forces that wanted to change it for thousands of years.

The religion founded by the man betrayed by His own Apostle and then disowned or abandoned by the rest, executed brutally and sadistically by the Romans, that religion went on to conquer the Roman world within a few centuries and then make its way through the whole world for thousands of years. Why? Because Jesus rose from the dead and against His Church the gates of hell won’t prevail.

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

#425

Post by EMIRELADERO » Fri, Jan 31, 2025, 6:31 AM UTC

arresin wrote: post #408

stevenhuang wrote: post #407

I understand where they're coming from with this, but I feel this perspective on work is exactly what needs to change. If true automation comes, society as a whole should move past the idea that one must find meaning/growth in performing economically valuable work. > 70. Since work is a “part of the meaning of life on this earth, a path to growth, human development and personal fulfillment,” “the goal should not be t…

The amount of economically valuable work to be done is infinite and hopefully advances in AI will help us better able to do it.

> The amount of economically valuable work to be done is infinite

Sure, but that doesn't mean it has to be done by humans.

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

#426

Post by andsoitis » Fri, Jan 31, 2025, 7:02 AM UTC

marc_abonce wrote: post #406

blindhippo wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could be argued that the emergence of the web and search engines in particular has established this as a common pattern long before AI was around. I'm not convinced that AI represents a dramatic change to this behavior, though the point about anthropomorphizing AI likely acts as a magnifier.

I think the main difference is the degree of anthropomorphizing that happens with new chatbots. I mean, most kids in the 2000's didn't believe that they were literally asking Jeeves a question, but a lot of users today actually think of AI as an anthropomorphic being.

> but a lot of users today actually think of AI as an anthropomorphic being.

You think more than 10% of users?

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

#427

Post by dang » Fri, Jan 31, 2025, 7:04 AM UTC

bena wrote: post #364

dang wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 sit…

I did not attack him personally. I said apologetics were already argued by people far more intelligent than us.

You used the words "you" and "your" 18 times in that comment, starting with the provocations "what's your stance on leprechauns" and "you are trying to equivocate", and ending with "I doubt you have the acumen". That's more than enough to come across as a personal attack, even though you didn't intend it that way (which, from your reply here, I gather you didn't).

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

#428

Post by Juliate » Fri, Jan 31, 2025, 7:18 AM UTC

nyokodo wrote: post #424

Juliate wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is also true from a Catholic point of view (I am). At the very least, that’s debatable or less absolute than that. Because evidence (schisms, actual errors from the Church institution throughout time, not the least sex scandals we are not done with yet) shows that if God was actively directing the Church in the past and today, oh boy… not sure you would be sane to want to follow such a “peculiar” guidance.

> Because evidence (schisms, actual errors from the Church institution throughout time, not the least sex scandals we are not done with yet) shows that if God was actively directing the Church in the past and today, oh boy… Except all the scandals and anti-Popes are empirical evidence of the Holy Spirit guiding the Church. Despite all that the teachings of the Church are fundamentally unchanged. I can read St Justin…

I don’t buy this so much as this is the perfect excuse for evil in humanity to continue to govern, wherever it is (“yeah it’s bad, but there’s a Plan behind all this” - very similar to how Qanon tried to operate).

You see continuity and consistence while others see that it’s not only the religion that conquered the Roman world, but the Roman Empire that also conquered the religion to secure its existence.

So much of the Church extension starting from the XIth century, comes, shouts even, more from its Roman heritage than from its Christian’s (one thread being that it mixed temporal and spiritual concerns instead of making them obviously distinct).

But “we” take it for some divine inspiration and spiritual guidance while it’s merely equivalent to humans laws: contextual, biased and open to critique and upgrades down the line.

What’s remarkable is the totally opposed, considerations we can have on the Church (and it seems, the concepts of hell & heaven), while having the same fidelity to the Christ’s teaching (which, in the end, matters most), and both seeing how the institution both sabotages and helps its mission.

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

#429

Post by kouru225 » Fri, Jan 31, 2025, 8:16 AM UTC

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.

They do pretty good at keeping the most vulnerable in line, but the moment someone develops a solid foundation and becomes competent enough they have to give up some of their power to them and strike a deal.

AGI would only get smarter and smarter the more hardware came out. They'd have no way to keep it in check. If they tried to handicap it then they'd lose out to their competitors AGI too...

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

#430

Post by kouru225 » Fri, Jan 31, 2025, 8:16 AM UTC

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?

Knowledge and reliance. How are they ever gonna know what the AGI is doing when the AGI can hide it faster than they can find it? How are they ever gonna come to the conclusion that the AGI is doing something bad when the AGI is the only thing that can fully explain what its doing?