Since I’m asking LW readers I imagine the default ‘degree of credence’ for any proof is something that the vast majority of LW readers will accept as the actual, bonafide, truth and are willing to acknowledge this when presented with it.
And predicting the future on a global scale, successfully, repeatedly, and precisely, has no correlated measures, if we assume precognition is impossible.
So we can conveniently sidestep this issue. Hence why I mentioned it…
I’m not sure there exists a formal operational definition of “general intelligence”, there’s no direct measurement possible
Then how can anyone prove, in the future, whether an AGI exists, or not?
Oh. Your model of LW readers is very different from mine—I doubt there exists anything that “the vast majority” will accept as “actual, bonafide truth”. In fact, words like actual and bonafide are likely to confuse most of us, and we’ll want clarification.
Then how can anyone prove, in the future, whether an AGI exists, or not?
I don’t think anyone can (and I don’t think they’ll have to—it’ll either be self-evident or irrelevant). But you said you didn’t want to extrapolate to that anyway.
Since I’m asking LW readers I imagine the default ‘degree of credence’ for any proof is something that the vast majority of LW readers will accept as the actual, bonafide, truth and are willing to acknowledge this when presented with it.
And predicting the future on a global scale, successfully, repeatedly, and precisely, has no correlated measures, if we assume precognition is impossible.
So we can conveniently sidestep this issue. Hence why I mentioned it…
Then how can anyone prove, in the future, whether an AGI exists, or not?
Oh. Your model of LW readers is very different from mine—I doubt there exists anything that “the vast majority” will accept as “actual, bonafide truth”. In fact, words like actual and bonafide are likely to confuse most of us, and we’ll want clarification.
I don’t think anyone can (and I don’t think they’ll have to—it’ll either be self-evident or irrelevant). But you said you didn’t want to extrapolate to that anyway.
So then what is the issue you want to discuss?
Neither of us can do more than offer our guesses and opinions on these two points.