[ian807]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carlhole', '
')The pace of progress in this area seems stunning to me. It just makes me wonder about a future world populated by useless billions of "ordinary" people - people whose personal skills and talents are completely subsumed by machine intelligence (or maybe ultimately environment intelligence).

[Carlhole]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ian807', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carlhole', '
')The pace of progress in this area seems stunning to me. It just makes me wonder about a future world populated by useless billions of "ordinary" people - people whose personal skills and talents are completely subsumed by machine intelligence (or maybe ultimately environment intelligence).

[Arthur75]

You peasants are kinda funny, "AI" isn't going anywhere, you can mark my words on that, and these so called "scientists" are just plain clowns

[Outcast_Searcher]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Arthur75', 'Y')ou peasants are kinda funny, "AI" isn't going anywhere, you can mark my words on that, and these so called "scientists" are just plain clowns

[Arthur75]

Yes of course it's an opinion (but also a knowledge), there is nothing to "prove" there, as stupid as discussions regarding whether there is a god or not, however it happens to be the right opinion : Not only "AI" doesn't exist as a scientific domain, but it isn't going anywhere. There could be something to show, but too lazy for that, let's just say there is Rimbaud and Nietzsche on one side, Gödel on the other.

[Dezakin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carlhole', 'H')mmm... what would Adolf do?

[Dezakin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carlhole', 'T')he brain scanning technology to see into the brain and copy the neuronal architecture to high resolution has only just recently gotten underway. But the progress is very rapid. And the recent advances in supercomputing also make virtual minds inevitable.

[Outcast_Searcher]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Arthur75', 'Y')es of course it's an opinion (but also a knowledge), there is nothing to "prove" there, as stupid as discussions regarding whether there is a god or not, however it happens to be the right opinion : Not only "AI" doesn't exist as a scientific domain, but it isn't going anywhere. There could be something to show, but too lazy for that, let's just say there is Rimbaud and Nietzsche on one side, Gödel on the other.

[Carlhole]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Outcast_Searcher', 'H')owever, folks like Ray Kurzweil in books like "The Age of Spiritual Machines" show many examples of how slowly but surely, real progress is being made.

Now, I'll admit folks in Kurzweil's camp tend to be their own worst enemy by being wildly optimistic and having to scale their expectations back (kind of like doomers and predicting oil prices, BTW).

[ian807]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carlhole', 'W')ouldn't it be terrible if the super-planetary-intelligence ended up believing in Jesus?

[ian807]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Arthur75', 'Y')ou peasants are kinda funny, "AI" isn't going anywhere, you can mark my words on that, and these so called "scientists" are just plain clowns

[Arthur75]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Outcast_Searcher', '
')
However, just saying there is "nothing to prove" and naming a few philosophers doesn't demonstrate that.

[ian807]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Arthur75', 'A')nd what happened in Mathematics at the turn of the XIXth XXth century is indeed very important : We now -know- that any initiative resembling the "principia Mathematica" of Russel and Whitehead is doomed to failure, can be useful to reread this story and associated theorem

[Arthur75]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ian807', 'r')ather than a lengthy, obfuscating historical review.

[Dezakin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Arthur75', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ian807', 'r')ather than a lengthy, obfuscating historical review.

[Arthur75]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dezakin', '
')Which Gödel theorem are you citing? Because I don't think it means what you think it means, and certainly isn't relevant to the discussion of AI in the way you think it is.

[mos6507]

Interesting to see Dezakin posting again. I remember his name mostly from a debate in which he professed his loving support for an intergalactic manifest destiny in which we wring the life out of earth and leave it as a dead husk as we head warp-speed out the stars (presumably just us and the few select genomes we deem useful for food, companionship, and scenery).

[EnergyUnlimited]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Article posted by Carlhole', 'H')owever, if we take the possibility of successful human brain emulations this century
seriously, and find some plausibility to the above discussion, more rigorous and extensive
analysis would be well worth the effort.

[Dezakin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Arthur75', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dezakin', '
')Which Gödel theorem are you citing? Because I don't think it means what you think it means, and certainly isn't relevant to the discussion of AI in the way you think it is.

[Arthur75]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dezakin', '
')
You're invoking the second incompleteness theorem, but really you're just tossing around mathematics without actually knowing what it means. The incompleteness theorems relate to the existence of undecidable statements, not to the discussion at hand.