Might be an artifact of what Kelly talks about but I think the focus on Immortality towards the beginning is too strong and not helpful. Speculating about that technology is distracting from the more general idea of the power of super intelligence and it’s not actually neccesary or even a first step to how recursive AI will transform the world.
Other than that, I like the essay on the whole.
Also a useful enhancement that is not addressed: Meta-research becomes hugely faster and more useful with massively increased speed and processing power, and doesn’t require experimentation. A hyperintelligence can aggregate way more data that already exists than we can, and apply it more usefully.
A hyperintelligence can aggregate way more data that already exists than we can, and apply it more usefully.
People often seem to miss that difference. Machine intelligence isn’t just us, but faster. The vanity of the Turing test struck me the other day. A machine is intelligent when it an pass for us. Are we supposed to be the be all and end all of intelligence?
A vastly greater working memory, attention span, etc., can make problems of search and integration much easier. At least at first, machine intelligence will be most effective when used in collaboration with people. We’ve already got a lot of human style intelligence in people—I’d rather get new and complementary abilities.
Thanks. I address immortality early on because it is a main point that Kelly addresses throughout his short piece. I appreciate your point about meta-research, but my intuition says that it might be even harder for many to grasp than the points in the post. Can you name concrete instances where meta-research led to breakthroughs?
Might be an artifact of what Kelly talks about but I think the focus on Immortality towards the beginning is too strong and not helpful. Speculating about that technology is distracting from the more general idea of the power of super intelligence and it’s not actually neccesary or even a first step to how recursive AI will transform the world.
Other than that, I like the essay on the whole.
Also a useful enhancement that is not addressed: Meta-research becomes hugely faster and more useful with massively increased speed and processing power, and doesn’t require experimentation. A hyperintelligence can aggregate way more data that already exists than we can, and apply it more usefully.
People often seem to miss that difference. Machine intelligence isn’t just us, but faster. The vanity of the Turing test struck me the other day. A machine is intelligent when it an pass for us. Are we supposed to be the be all and end all of intelligence?
A vastly greater working memory, attention span, etc., can make problems of search and integration much easier. At least at first, machine intelligence will be most effective when used in collaboration with people. We’ve already got a lot of human style intelligence in people—I’d rather get new and complementary abilities.
Thanks. I address immortality early on because it is a main point that Kelly addresses throughout his short piece. I appreciate your point about meta-research, but my intuition says that it might be even harder for many to grasp than the points in the post. Can you name concrete instances where meta-research led to breakthroughs?