@HA: No, it’s not a knockdown crush. It’s one short section out of a long document. Maybe I’ll do a knockdown crush on OB, or SIAI’s blog, later after having had time to build more background. You might be able to find more detailed discussion in the SL4 / Extropians / wta-talk archive, or not—even I don’t remember what’s in there any more. Certainly, though, it’s an idea that’s been discussed.
@Robin:
Because Schank admits to being too optimistic in his youth, Eliezer feels free to dismiss Schank’s judgment as “sloppy futurism”, and so worth far less weight than his own analysis.
There is a sharp distinction between what Schank may have learned about the human mind in his career—admittedly, I wouldn’t put too much weight even on that, because I think my era supports me; most of the Elders here are formidable old warriors with hopelessly obsolete arms and armor—but anyway, there’s a sharp distinction between what Schank knows about cognitive science, and how he applies that to make predictions six decades out. Sort of akin to the distinction between what Einstein knew about physics, and how he applied it to talk about an impersonal deity who must have created the universe. There are people who aspire to be careful in all realms including futurism, but they are very rare, and I see no evidence so far that Schank is one of these people.
@HA: No, it’s not a knockdown crush. It’s one short section out of a long document. Maybe I’ll do a knockdown crush on OB, or SIAI’s blog, later after having had time to build more background. You might be able to find more detailed discussion in the SL4 / Extropians / wta-talk archive, or not—even I don’t remember what’s in there any more. Certainly, though, it’s an idea that’s been discussed.
@Robin:
There is a sharp distinction between what Schank may have learned about the human mind in his career—admittedly, I wouldn’t put too much weight even on that, because I think my era supports me; most of the Elders here are formidable old warriors with hopelessly obsolete arms and armor—but anyway, there’s a sharp distinction between what Schank knows about cognitive science, and how he applies that to make predictions six decades out. Sort of akin to the distinction between what Einstein knew about physics, and how he applied it to talk about an impersonal deity who must have created the universe. There are people who aspire to be careful in all realms including futurism, but they are very rare, and I see no evidence so far that Schank is one of these people.