From: Joaquim Almgren Gāndara (email@example.com)
Date: Fri Sep 15 2000 - 12:18:16 MDT
Nice intro, sounds a bit like a summary of Great Mambo Chicken. I really like it, you've managed to sum up a lot of information on one page and still keep it readable. Although it says, regarding an upgrade of neurons, that "time would pass a million times faster for you", and then goes on to say "more than a century of subjective time would pass every hour of realtime". Intuitively, these two sound like contradictions, since the first statement sounds like we would experience reality at a higher speed and the other contradicts it. However, please tell me if I'm a stupid Swedish person who doesn't understand English.
Well, I have apparently misunderstood what you've written in your Meaning of Life FAQ: "If computing power doubles every two years, what happens when computers are doing the research?" I thought that to achieve a higher order of Moore's Law, we need to actually hook up a seed AI to a factory, since humans are just too slow and dumb to carry out its instructions. Cut out the middle-man, if you will. However, that intro to the Singularity seems to stick to the Lenat/EURISKO model of computer-*aided* design. I thought that such an approach would be ineffective..?
- Joaquim Gāndara
----- Original Message -----
From: Eliezer S. Yudkowsky <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2000 8:39 PM
Subject: Re: (no subject)
> Um, both of you folks may want to take a fast look at "An Introduction to the
> -- -- -- -- --
> Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://intelligence.org/
> Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:35 MDT