From: Randall Randall (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Dec 31 2003 - 18:32:58 MST
On Wednesday, December 31, 2003, at 07:39 PM, Robin Lee Powell wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 04:14:58PM -0800, Tommy McCabe wrote:
>> --- Randall Randall <email@example.com> wrote:
>>> This is not at all true. I think it's quite arguable that
>>> strong superintelligence is impossible. For instance, it might
>>> be that physical law doesn't permit complexity above some
>>> ceiling. If so, it might be that the smartest possible humans
>>> are already very close to that limit.
>> The difference between 'the smartest possible huamns' and 'the
>> dumbest possible humans' is incredibly tiny in the space of all
>> minds in general. There is quite possibly some hard upper limit to
>> intelligence, but for it to be exactly in the incredibly narrow
>> range of minds represented by Homo sapiens sapiens would be almost
>> an absurdity.
> I think Randall's point is that if there is an upper bound, humans
> might be as smart as we are because we've already hit it.
Yes, this was exactly my point.
Mind you, I don't have a lot of reason to think that it's the
case, but I do subscribe to the lesser position that humans are
nearly at the limit of intelligence for the kind of architecture
we run on. I have little evidence of it, but none of the
-- Randall Randall firstname.lastname@example.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:43 MDT