From: Stathis Papaioannou (stathisp@gmail.com)
Date: Tue May 06 2008 - 07:59:25 MDT
2008/5/6 Nick Tarleton <nickptar@gmail.com>:
> On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 2:28 AM, Stathis Papaioannou <stathisp@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Have you considered the possibility that not everything about a person
> > could be understood by analysing a limited set of observations? Even
> > if you if you had knowledge of the human's brain down to the molecular
> > level, due to the effect of chaos after a short time his behaviour
> > would deviate from any simulation you might run.
>
> Then how could signaling be any more useful? It's very unlikely to be
> any better of a predictor of how future chaotic neural firings will
> go.
The point is that there will always be an element of unpredictability
in anything humans do. People still run races, hope to win races and
bet on races when the odds are believed to be known. An AI would give
a better estimate of the odds and maybe eliminate competitors who are
grossly outmatched, but it wouldn't thereby eliminate the desire for
competition.
-- Stathis Papaioannou
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:01:02 MDT