From: Stuart Armstrong (dragondreaming@googlemail.com)
Date: Fri Jun 20 2008 - 13:51:51 MDT
> Also, most of the tests for above-human intelligence mentioned earlier, like winning an election or producing a blockbuster movie require judgment by a large group of people (voters or movie goers), which is collectively more intelligent than any individual. How do you collectively test for intelligence greater than the collective intelligence of all humanity?
What about the ones that do not require human intelligence to test it
- being the first to build a copy of Manhattan on the moon of Uranus,
or assembling a living copy of a certain human being from inert
materials?
I'm sceptical of any one problem to use as a test (especially the
mathematical ones). By "intelligence", we refer to a wide variety of
abilities, not just mathematical skill; we would need several tests to
encourage what we mean by intelligence.
> There are no provably hard problems.
There is another issue: there may be problems where superior
intelligence cannot result in better result. If we were to take
playing Tic-tac-toe as a test, this would not help, as Tic-tac-toe is
fully solved, even for us. Maybe some of these suggested tests are of
the same nature; any entity with an "IQ" of 400 can fully solve it as
fast as it can be done, so increases in "IQ" don't help (and it may be
true, but unprovable, that no improvements exist).
>any other ideas
None for the moment, but I'll think about it.
Stuart
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:01:03 MDT