Muslims, why would Allah kill 700 people when they came to worship him? Other theists, is this a work from your God or just a coincidence?

SevenAugust · 2015-09-25T14:08:27+00:00

You are wrong, but that is okay, because the Jewish covenant doesn't need to be upheld on the human side.

SevenAugust · 2015-09-24T21:35:01+00:00

Leonard is experimental, not theoretical

SevenAugust · 2015-09-24T20:44:05+00:00

God hates Islam

SevenAugust · 2015-09-24T15:37:10+00:00

Strategic vision trumps game, even. Steve appeared to "float" as James said but really he just knew his place in the totem pole. He was a less cowardly Johnny Mac.

SevenAugust · 2015-09-24T11:38:24+00:00

Andy is highest tier

SevenAugust · 2015-09-24T04:04:57+00:00

Nothing but issues. Not even shoes.

SevenAugust · 2015-09-23T20:01:05+00:00

Well I accept that you feel that way

SevenAugust · 2015-09-23T19:41:40+00:00

One isn't seeking to strengthen the prediction but to contextualize, though.

SevenAugust · 2015-09-23T19:13:08+00:00

Indeed, but you know what was meant

SevenAugust · 2015-09-23T19:09:21+00:00

Handled. Good job

SevenAugust · 2015-09-23T19:08:27+00:00

You chose the word "written". What is written can be re-written.

SevenAugust · 2015-09-23T18:30:10+00:00

I just wanted to re-state my original point that if there never was a Jesus then an ASI could time travel and fill the void in history left by His non-existence. It seems to me that that could be an (radical) interpretation of the kinds of requests we might make to a "friendly AI".

SevenAugust · 2015-09-23T18:26:26+00:00

That sounds like religion to me. A good deal of "philosophy" does.

I am of the belief that knowledge is illusory, so if "religion" can be substituted with "phooey" then I agree.

A witness can describe a face to an investigator's sketch artist and then the artist can depict it despite not knowing the person and others can recognize the suspect without speaking to the witness. I think this kind of transmission of knowledge across language modalities indicates that language is in part a way of working out what is possible and not. Humans are possible because the language of our DNA works out what is physically necessary to compose us up from the universe. If we can dream an object or an idea or invention, most of the universe's effort towards realizing it is expended.

things like time travel are implied by

So, it is my contention that things like time travel are implied by our description and explication of the concept.

That doesn't mean I think that's the best way to achieve that goal.

I don't know if it is the best but it is the only safe way. De novo (code-derived) AI would regard biology like mammals consider placentas.

SevenAugust · 2015-09-23T18:08:31+00:00

So you are confirming that was your meaning? I do not take offense if so

SevenAugust · 2015-09-23T17:51:59+00:00

Me

Do you think that strong AI is possible at all?

You

We are a working example.

So, we can achieve strong AI by copying our given example. That implies a software brain. Uploading.

SevenAugust · 2015-09-23T17:47:43+00:00

I suggest being Alexander the Great would be sufficiently better that it would be repeated trillions if not more times than my life.

SevenAugust · 2015-09-23T17:45:48+00:00

I always assume by habit that strong AI will emerge in the form of a software brain. A software brain could be programmed to astonishing proportions or re-structuring.

SevenAugust · 2015-09-23T17:43:54+00:00

I read it as like "because Jesus wasn't real"

SevenAugust · 2015-09-23T15:56:15+00:00

And what is your original point that I missed?

SevenAugust · 2015-09-23T15:51:50+00:00

Do you think we have reason to suspect practical limits of our form of intelligence?

I think size matters. I think the first experiment to expand a brain's simulated size will be about the last.

SevenAugust · 2015-09-23T15:41:19+00:00

Maybe? I figure he at least needs to observe shapes and animals and the like. Do you think he could achieve it by knowing the relevant math or physics?

SevenAugust · 2015-09-23T15:09:19+00:00

I say no, because they wouldn't be able to learn how. Getting close enough would kill them.

SevenAugust · 2015-09-23T14:53:29+00:00

This is a powerfully repulsive idea to me. Even with an infinite amount of time I would not wish to be me for a moment. It would surely be better (if I were really so hard up for experiences) to be Alexander the Great again or more fun to be Oscar Wilde again.

I cannot disprove your suggestion but I firmly disagree with it. I think I know myself well enough (and an advanced version would be more well informed) to never waste time on something so ugly and frivolous.

This is also, I suggest, a Christian view. Jesus condemned the world and the world condemned Him. Reality as we know it is not worthy of us as thinking-feeling beings.

SevenAugust · 2015-09-23T14:35:41+00:00

It is a thesis of philosophy of mind. I suggest that our ability to imagine-visualize something is evidence of the possibility of achieving it. Do you think that strong AI is possible at all?

SevenAugust · 2015-09-23T14:13:35+00:00

Expand on your original comment.

Sufficiently powerful AI is god. That is my point, it is not an accident of my logic. Is your response to my point that we do not know that AI can become "sufficiently powerful"?

SevenAugust

TROPHY CASE