News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:John Carmack: I’m going to work on artificial general int... by jacquesm on Wednesday November 13, 2019 @09:17PM (#21532186)
I'm not in Carmack's league by any stretch of the imagination but I earn a living with being able to absorb a lot of data on a new field in a very short time so I have some idea of what that is like. When other people have already done all the hard work for you that's very easy going if you have some basic knowledge that you can integrate the new stuff with. But that's an entirely different matter compared to actually moving the needle on new stuff, this takes years at a minimum; and is not something that you can do by reading up and then rolling up your shirtsleeves. If only it were that easy. There are 100's of John Carmacks in various fields, I've met a couple and while in the past this sort of attitude was a prerequisite to being a scientist (in the 1800's every scientist was pretty much a polymath, there wasn't all that much knowledge to begin with) nowadays any science worth doing is going to require a lot of specialization first.

This is akin to the way - on topic - computer games have developed; in the early days almost all games were made by individuals. Now it is all studios and teamwork, very rarely does an individual still manage to break out of the mold and the level of expectation that we've set. But when it does happen (Minecraft, for instance) it can be a runaway success.

Anyway, I wish John the very best but I think the chances of an Armadillo repeat are somewhat higher than of him coming out of his closet with a working AGI, and just in case he does I'm not sure the rest of the world is going to be ready for that (entirely different discussion, there are plenty of SF books and movies exploring that theme).

Re:John Carmack: I’m going to work on artificial general int... by marvin on Thursday November 14, 2019 @07:25AM (#21534835)
> nowadays any science worth doing is going to require a lot of specialization first

This seems like one of those seemingly-obvious points that everyone believes but has a decent chance of being proved completely wrong by an unexpected discovery or breakthrough. Assuming I understand you correctly; knowing which giants to stand on has consistently proven to be a requirement - both in science and engineering.

But I see you're sort of alluding to this at the end of your comment, where you're not dismissing this effort as meaningless, but rather not a guaranteed success.