Singularity Objections
singinst.org
Singularity Objections
1–10 of 15 posts
Re: Singularity Objections
#2We might live in a computer simulation and it might be too computationally expensive for our simulators to simulate our world post-singularity.
That's an awful lot of "mights".
Re: Singularity Objections
#3We might live in a computer simulation and it might be too computationally expensive for our simulators to simulate our world post-singularity. That's an awful lot of "mights".
At least he was careful to use "might." They are soothsaying, after all.
Luckily, he won't be able to say "I told you so" when our universe runs out of memory.
Re: Singularity Objections
#4Extrapolation of graphs doesn’t prove anything.
The induction fallacy is what allows humans to get up in the morning and make decisions with incomplete data i guess.
Re: Singularity Objections
#5We might live in a computer simulation and it might be too computationally expensive for our simulators to simulate our world post-singularity. That's an awful lot of "mights".
You know, I always figured that a computer-simulated world would have smart compression techniques. Thus, the massive quantity of electrons flying around necessary for a brain impulse, for instance, only "exists" when someone does an MRI (or whatever tool they use for that sort of thing). Otherwise, a reference to "pleasure" or "pain" is passed into the perceptions.
Re: Singularity Objections
#6More interesting is the lower paragraph which discusses objections to creating a friendly transhuman AGI, given that it is possible to create a transhuman AGI. I am aware that singinst thinks a lot about these issues..is anyone aware of any other organizations working with these things?
Re: Singularity Objections
#7I always have time for a well reasoned argument even if it contradicts my own view. These arguments are not well argued and they contradict my view. I regret reading that article.
Re: Singularity Objections
#8We might live in a computer simulation and it might be too computationally expensive for our simulators to simulate our world post-singularity. That's an awful lot of "mights".
You know, I always figured that a computer-simulated world would have smart compression techniques. Thus, the massive quantity of electrons flying around necessary for a brain impulse, for instance, only "exists" when someone does an MRI (or whatever tool they use for that sort of thing). Otherwise, a reference to "pleasure" or "pain" is passed into the perceptions.
So the Singularity is when we abstract out all the stuff that only exists to trick us into thinking we've evolved from more primitive beings?
Re: Singularity Objections
#9You know, simulated universes might not exist simply to exist.
For instance, perhaps they are a form of communication? We could be just a really complex story that one being is telling to another.
Re: Singularity Objections
#10I sent him this objection:
We already build very powerful intelligences all the time, in the form of children. But despite having a lot of raw computing power, they aren't very useful without knowledge. They need to learn a lot of things before they can live effectively, solve important problems, etc...
Artificial intelligence and intelligence are not fundamentally different things. If you want AI's that turn out better than children do, you'll need improved parenting and educational techniques, or an alternative. I haven't seen any commentary on how singularity people plan to deal with this. And if they could, why not just use that technique on human children and vastly improve the world, now?
The main difference between AI and children I've seen proposed is that the AIs can run on superior hardware. But it's not like people currently use all the hardware resources their brain makes available; maybe that will be a bottleneck in the future, but it isn't one we've hit yet.