Are you not reading what I wrote? You yourself just suggested a method of curing all those things you wrote. So obviously it's possible to imagine them. You don't know how exactly, but you have a starting point: inject some sort of protective something that will do it.
Why do you think I would laugh at them? It seems quite plausible to me.
You are totally wrong about people in 1920. People 2000 years ago even were eating various plants for their medicinal effect. Some of the books from that time (or a little later) still exist! And some of them even work (willow bark for pain for example).
That does not exist with AI. Give me any idea at all of a programming method (besides random permutation) that will, eventually, even with a lot of work, result in AI.
You don't realize just how much harder creating creativity is from anything else humanity has ever done. Create a mechanism that will create something new that has never existed before? (And is not simply a reshuffling of other things.) Computers can not do that, and I don't think will ever be able to do that. (Again, except by trying everything randomly.) Even humans rarely do that - and the ones that do have no idea how they do it, so what makes you think we can program such a thing?
Read some quotes from Mark Kac about magician genius and you'll start to understand the problem. No one has any idea how they make their leaps. A regular genius simply can not do what they do. So why do you think we can program a computer to do such a thing, when we can not even understand how it's done in the first place?
AI is not coming. And on top of all that computing speed has hit a wall. The entire premise depends on computers getting faster and faster. They aren't right now. Intel can not make CPU's run any faster than they are right now. Instead they are adding cores.
Now I expect that to be solved at some point, but it means the exponential growth curve broke. And that means no more singularity.
That's something I don't see much talk of. But it's over, there is no more exponential growth in computing speed.
Comments
Are you not reading what I wrote? You yourself just suggested a method of curing all those things you wrote. So obviously it's possible to imagine them. You don't know how exactly, but you have a starting point: inject some sort of protective something that will do it.
Why do you think I would laugh at them? It seems quite plausible to me.
You are totally wrong about people in 1920. People 2000 years ago even were eating various plants for their medicinal effect. Some of the books from that time (or a little later) still exist! And some of them even work (willow bark for pain for example).
That does not exist with AI. Give me any idea at all of a programming method (besides random permutation) that will, eventually, even with a lot of work, result in AI.
You don't realize just how much harder creating creativity is from anything else humanity has ever done. Create a mechanism that will create something new that has never existed before? (And is not simply a reshuffling of other things.) Computers can not do that, and I don't think will ever be able to do that. (Again, except by trying everything randomly.) Even humans rarely do that - and the ones that do have no idea how they do it, so what makes you think we can program such a thing?
Read some quotes from Mark Kac about magician genius and you'll start to understand the problem. No one has any idea how they make their leaps. A regular genius simply can not do what they do. So why do you think we can program a computer to do such a thing, when we can not even understand how it's done in the first place?
AI is not coming. And on top of all that computing speed has hit a wall. The entire premise depends on computers getting faster and faster. They aren't right now. Intel can not make CPU's run any faster than they are right now. Instead they are adding cores.
Now I expect that to be solved at some point, but it means the exponential growth curve broke. And that means no more singularity.
That's something I don't see much talk of. But it's over, there is no more exponential growth in computing speed.