[info] [singularity] ESSAY: Artificial intelligence within our lifetime?

Tue Mar 27 16:57:07 UTC 2007

When all those smart people in the AI business stop using the word 
"intelligence" as loosely as drunks in a beer parlour, maybe they will 
realize that they have superhuman AI right now.

PtP

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Eugen Leitl" <eugen at leitl.org>
To: <info at postbiota.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 8:38 AM
Subject: Re: [info] [singularity] ESSAY: Artificial intelligence within 
ourlifetime?

----- Forwarded message from Kaj Sotala <xuenay at gmail.com> -----

From: Kaj Sotala <xuenay at gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 17:19:37 +0300
To: singularity at v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: [singularity] ESSAY: Artificial intelligence within our 
lifetime?
Reply-To: singularity at v2.listbox.com

On 3/26/07, Richard Loosemore <rpwl at lightlink.com> wrote:
>Kaj,
>
>My first thoughts are that my reasons for thinking it will happen are so
>extremely local, where the ones you cite are global.
>
>What I mean is that you list a number of very general reasons why, but
>in each of your cases I see a conflict between the optimism of your
>summary and the reality on the ground.  This makes me very nervous.

Richard,

what you're saying does sound worrisome - and now that I think of it,
it does sound plausiblé. After all, scientists do need to spend a lot
of time and effort to master even one field of study - trying to gain
the deep sort of understanding that must be required to successfully
_apply_ complicated concepts from one field to another may very well
be beyond the capabilities of many. Currently I'm only a first-year
CogSci student, but I'm already seeing part of this in my own studies
- I'd like to pick *at least* three minors (psychology, computer
science and maths - philosophy and neurology on top of those would be
nice, too) plus maybe even do a double major at another university to
gain a comprehensive understanding of the field and issues involved -
and the system is pretty much built with the assumption that we'd pick
exactly two minors. Sigh.

Ah well. Still, the things I mentioned in my essay will probably still
help out those few who are brave enough to do true multidisciplinary
work. Even if they are very few in numbers...

Then again, it's probably only good if development towards true AI is
slow. With any luck, a slow take-off won't be as hazardous and
unpredictable as a hard one...

>
>For example, you cite the interdisciplinary nature of this field.  Well,
>in fact, I am looking at it from the inside (having crossed disciplines,
>and having been hanging out with people in the AI/CogSci field ever
>since I graduated, and what I see is *lip-sevice* interdisciplinary work
>which is always a shotgun marriage at best.  I see little fragments of
>ideas going across, but always with distortion and simplification, and
>almost always in such a way that the idea is *appropriated* rather than
>used.  To be blunt about it, people take some phrase x-y-z from the
>field across the fence, find an excuse to say that they are doing x-y-z
>by incorporating some shadow of the real x-y-z, and then they get cool
>points from all the folks in their own field, who don't really know what
>x-y-z is, but are impressed by the sound of it.
>
>I exagerate slightly, but you get the general idea.  To an outsider this
>might sound like cynicism on my part -- people think, hey these are
>scientists, right?  They wouldn't be that crummy, surely? -- but the
>horrible, horrible truth is that this really is the way that things
>happen.  You would not believe the extent to which science these days is
>a matter of personal spin and marketing.  And this is especially
>pronounced in the case of "interdisciplinary" interactions.
>
>In cognitive psychology, for example, interaction with AI folks used to
>be a big thing 30 years ago.  Then it gradually died out.  Today, it
>hardly happens at all, except with the rump of the old-school AI folks.
>
>The same story can be applied separately to each of the fields you talk
>about.  Brain imaging in particular.
>
>But now, on a more positive note, I think that none of what you say will
>make any difference BUT some progress will come out of left field, and
>that in the fullness of time it will turn out that the one thing that
>made the singularity happen was a single set of discoveries of a
>theoretical or practical nature.
>
>I happen to believe that I am working in precisely that direction, but I
>have to try to keep my self-confidence in check for fear of giving the
>wrong impression.  But it doesn't have to be me that gets it to work, it
>could be you, or someone else that none of us has heard of yet.
>
>Summary:  I take everything that the big guns are doing with a pinch of
>salt, but I have enormous faith in the creativity of the girls and boys
>out there who are trying to think outside the box.  They are the ones
>who are going to make it happen.
>
>
>Richard Loosemore
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>-----
>This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
>To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
>http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=11983
>

-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=11983

----- End forwarded message -----
-- 
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820            http://www.ativel.com
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
_______________________________________________
info mailing list
info at postbiota.org
http://postbiota.org/mailman/listinfo/info

-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.18/734 - Release Date: 3/26/2007 
2:31 PM