|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Feb 26, 2019 22:07:28 GMT
...and some plan to with using atomic bombs. What have humanity created?!
|
|
|
|
Post by fschmidt on Feb 26, 2019 22:53:00 GMT
Don't worry, humanity has become too stupid to really solve AI. As far as I know, recent robots have just refined old AI algorithms. There has been no real innovation. So humanity will be saved from AI by humanity's own stupidity. Obviously any form of real intelligence would consider humans to be moronic pests and exterminate them/us.
|
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Feb 26, 2019 23:01:21 GMT
Don't worry, humanity has become too stupid to really solve AI. As far as I know, recent robots have just refined old AI algorithms. There has been no real innovation. So humanity will be saved from AI by humanity's own stupidity. Obviously any form of real intelligence would consider humans to be moronic pests and exterminate them/us. I agree with this. Humans will exterminate themselves. Although, wasn't too sure what you meant in the beginning. What do you mean by "solve AI"? Like they only got to one step with AI and dont know what to do next? Or there's a problem they can't solve with AI? |
|
|
|
Post by fschmidt on Feb 26, 2019 23:27:12 GMT
What do you mean by "solve AI"? Like they only got to one step with AI and dont know what to do next? Or there's a problem they can't solve with AI? I don't really like talking about this, but I will mention it here. I studied the brain to try to understand how it works. In particular, I studied the structure of neurons (dendrites) and how signaling works at the synapse level. I think I have a basic understanding of how it works. It is based on an undiscovered branch of probability theory. Of course I am not sure if my idea is right, it is just a hypothesis. But the point is that to develop real artificial intelligence would require complete out-of-the-box thinking which humanity is generally no longer capable of. Those few of us who are have mostly gone insane or killed ourselves and if there are any more people like me out there, I am sure that they hate what humanity has degenerated into as much as I do and so they would never share anything of real importance with this disgusting species. And without this kind of fundamental insight, AI cannot really progress. |
|
|
|
Post by karl on Feb 27, 2019 0:03:06 GMT
What do you mean by "solve AI"? Like they only got to one step with AI and dont know what to do next? Or there's a problem they can't solve with AI? I don't really like talking about this, but I will mention it here. I studied the brain to try to understand how it works. In particular, I studied the structure of neurons (dendrites) and how signaling works at the synapse level. I think I have a basic understanding of how it works. It is based on an undiscovered branch of probability theory. Of course I am not sure if my idea is right, it is just a hypothesis. But the point is that to develop real artificial intelligence would require complete out-of-the-box thinking which humanity is generally no longer capable of. Those few of us who are have mostly gone insane or killed ourselves and if there are any more people like me out there, I am sure that they hate what humanity has degenerated into as much as I do and so they would never share anything of real importance with this disgusting species. And without this kind of fundamental insight, AI cannot really progress.
This goes directly into my work on the incompleteness theorem. Yes, it does link to probability, but not probability math that could ever be written as algorithms. What I believe is that the same math that underpins thought, also underpins quantum randomness. It's math based on unenumerable subsets of natural numbers, and therefore cannot be recognised as patterns. Any pattern could be identified and written as an algorithm. An unenumerable set represents infinite complexity, and hence would require the algorithm to be infinite. This is why quantum processes appear as entirely random, for the underlying mathematics doesn't manifest as identifiable patterns.
|
|
