From: Ben Goertzel (ben@webmind.com)
Date: Sun Jan 28 2001 - 12:45:11 MST
hi,
> I *know* evolution is a general and powerful process. It's the process
> that produced me, and I acknowledge that. I just think that intelligence
> is a *more* general and *more* powerful process. If evolution gets in the
> way of my declarative goals, or the declarative goals of a Friendly AI,
> then we'll *deal* with it, and without too much trouble. The emergent
> forces of evolution are unintelligent. I can outsmart them; a Friendly
> seed AI can outwit, outclass, and outgun them; a superintelligence can
> simply crush the forces involved via brute brainpower.
And this is what I don't believe.
When you say "brute brainpower", you're referring to a rather underspecified
collection of cognitive algorithms
My mathematical conjecture is that the ONLY effective algorithm for general
inference control is EVOLUTION.
I actually tried a while to prove this, and failed -- the mathematical
apparatus
just doesn't exist
I could be wrong of course...
> So when people argue that the character of post-Singularity reality is
> *still* going to be determined by evolution, on the grounds that evolution
> is going to sneak in and stomp on the goal systems of the transhumans that
> will enact the new world, I just don't buy it.
My argument is different: the thought process is intrinsically evolutionary,
I claim;
and so the mutation and "genetic drift" aspects of evolutionary optimization
will be present
in the course of development of AI's even if there is no evolution on the
inter-AI level
but only within the long-term development of individual Ai minds.
> Sure. Hedonic neurons, directed evolution in the human immune system...
> like I said, evolution is a very powerful method. Intelligence is *more*
> powerful. You just don't get to see that unless you have access to
> general intelligence - not algorithms, not classical-AI heuristics, but
> true general intelligence. Wait until Webmind starts writing vis own
> treatises on seed AI before you conclude that an evolutionary goal system
> is the best possible method...
Well, you could be right. But I doubt it. We'll see ;>
ben
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:35 MDT