Re: Things I never thought would appear

On 10/11/24 7:48 AM, Keith F. Lynch wrote:

Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> wrote:

I don't think "human-level machine intelligence" is meaningful,
because computation to carry out tasks and cognition to further the
existence of a living organism aren't commensurable.

 I'm not convinced of that.  Nobody has come up with a task that a
person could do but that no computer could ever do.  There are tasks
that it's been proven computers can't do, but no person has proven
able to do them either.

You left out the part of my post where I said that carrying out tasks isn't the point. Human (and animal) intelligence is a faculty for maintaining and enhancing the life of which it is a part. We might be able to create machines whose prime directive is to survive, reproduce, and maximize their satisfaction (though I don't know what that would mean in a machine designed and created by humans), but it would be a bad idea.

 So I think it's not at all unlikely that computers, some of them in
humanoid robot bodies, will someday be able to do every task that
a person can do, better and less expensively.  At that point the
unemployment rate will increase to 100%.  Those who don't own stock
in the AI companies will have financial problems.

You're overlooking the principle of comparative advantage. People in such a world wouldn't sit around and wait for the machines to feed them. They'd do the things at which they're relatively best, while machines would do the tasks which they're relatively best at.

 Or, of course, the intelligent machines may decide we're a nuisance,
and wipe us out.
 A third category is uploaded people, i.e. human consciousnesses copied
into a computer.  Simply completely map a human brain and then emulate
it in software.  It would of course have the same memories and
personality as the original person.  By cranking up the clock
frequency, it could work must faster than us flesh people, get a
full night's sleep in a few seconds, or a lengthy vacation in a few
minutes.  And it could work for much less income, since it could
enjoy realistic virtual entertainments.  It would be potentially
immortal.  Or at least last as long as our civilization.

The key word there is "emulate." They wouldn't be people. At a minimum, they'd need to have human-equivalent bodies to keep the same personalities; otherwise they'd have different needs and different ways of interacting with the world, and so would diverge from human attitudes.
--
Gary McGath    http://www.mcgath.com