I second this. Just being able to remember what I’ve read would amplify my intelligence by at least one order of magnitude. I appreciate the argument that a brain-computer interface wouldn’t give you much beyond what you’d get by sitting down at a computer, but
(A) being able to google with my cell phone made me significantly smarter than only being able to google at my computer,
(B) being forced to state questions in formal language would GREATLY clarify peoples’ thinking,
(C) expanding my short-term memory store might greatly enhance my intelligence, and
(D) if the BCI is able to use pattern-recognition on my memory’s current contents versus the entire knowledge of humanity, pointing out analogies to systems described in books I haven’t even read, that would be tremendously useful.
(A) being able to google with my cell phone made me significantly smarter than only being able to google at my computer,
An easier way to deal with that is by improving VR to the point that people can spend virtually their entire waking lives at (probably stationary) computers with high-end I/O devices. Interface mobility is only an advantage if /physically moving around/ is worth doing, and we can probably remove a lot of the draw of that a lot easier than we can make BCIs work well.
(B) being forced to state questions in formal language would GREATLY clarify peoples’ thinking,
How are BCIs a major help with this?
Re. (C) and (D):
Agreed, but:
You can already get a non-crappy approximation to (C) at a computer, for instance by keeping open a window with some facts you’re trying to keep in mind.
If I understand Bostrom correctly, his contention is that going much beyond this level of convenience with BCIs would be hard; you’d need to do some very tricky interfacing (since it isn’t a usual I/O channel), and the tech to pull that off is likely to be AI-complete or close to it, itself.
I second this. Just being able to remember what I’ve read would amplify my intelligence by at least one order of magnitude. I appreciate the argument that a brain-computer interface wouldn’t give you much beyond what you’d get by sitting down at a computer, but
(A) being able to google with my cell phone made me significantly smarter than only being able to google at my computer,
(B) being forced to state questions in formal language would GREATLY clarify peoples’ thinking,
(C) expanding my short-term memory store might greatly enhance my intelligence, and
(D) if the BCI is able to use pattern-recognition on my memory’s current contents versus the entire knowledge of humanity, pointing out analogies to systems described in books I haven’t even read, that would be tremendously useful.
An easier way to deal with that is by improving VR to the point that people can spend virtually their entire waking lives at (probably stationary) computers with high-end I/O devices. Interface mobility is only an advantage if /physically moving around/ is worth doing, and we can probably remove a lot of the draw of that a lot easier than we can make BCIs work well.
How are BCIs a major help with this?
Re. (C) and (D): Agreed, but:
You can already get a non-crappy approximation to (C) at a computer, for instance by keeping open a window with some facts you’re trying to keep in mind.
If I understand Bostrom correctly, his contention is that going much beyond this level of convenience with BCIs would be hard; you’d need to do some very tricky interfacing (since it isn’t a usual I/O channel), and the tech to pull that off is likely to be AI-complete or close to it, itself.