Re:The singularity is close?
by RealityVoid on Friday April 01, 2022 @12:28AM
(#30875193)
> With no evidence in either direction, why assume that AGI is in the second category, rather than the third?
Because we have GI examples in nature, therefore it is possible. We just don't know how to do it, yet. The same way we saw birds flying, so we knew flight was possible, but we could not, at that time.
Why? We don’t know how to build it, even in theory, so shouldn’t the default be to say there’s no way of knowing it’s possible or not?
After all, some things from sci-fi have become reality (computers, the Internet) or haven’t but are obviously feasible (human travel to Mars) and some haven’t and seem unlikely ever to (faster-than-light travel, flying cars).
With no evidence in either direction, why assume that AGI is in the second category, rather than the third? There’s no natural law saying that everything that can be imagined is possible.
> GI is a real thing.
Yes, but GI isn’t AGI. AGI would require us to either use completely different materials with completely different efficiency characteristics and somehow achieve the same results, or learn to precisely manipulate organic materials (proteins, etc.). It’s not obvious to me why either of these is possible (or impossible — I’m not taking a stance either way).
Furthermore, even if it is possible to build AGI, there’s no a priori reason to believe that humans are smart enough to discover how.