Go Back   Bloggingheads Community > Diavlog comments
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Notices

Diavlog comments Post comments about particular diavlogs here.
(Users cannot create new threads.)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-07-2008, 10:41 AM
Bloggingheads Bloggingheads is offline
BhTV staff
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,936
Default Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-07-2008, 11:07 AM
osmium osmium is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: new yorkistan
Posts: 708
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

good masthead on your blog, eliezer. wow, right on.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-07-2008, 11:45 AM
beren beren is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 17
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

I've been reading overcomingbias.com for a long time, more out of interest than because I agree with their world view. It's certainly one of the most pretentious and eliteist blogs on the internet. They need to learn humility.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-07-2008, 12:51 PM
osmium osmium is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: new yorkistan
Posts: 708
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by beren View Post
I've been reading overcomingbias.com for a long time, more out of interest than because I agree with their world view. It's certainly one of the most pretentious and eliteist blogs on the internet. They need to learn humility.
interesting. i'll give it a read. for now i just looked at the pictures.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-07-2008, 06:21 PM
osmium osmium is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: new yorkistan
Posts: 708
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by beren View Post
I've been reading overcomingbias.com for a long time, more out of interest than because I agree with their world view. It's certainly one of the most pretentious and eliteist blogs on the internet. They need to learn humility.
i've watched the diavlog in piecemeal now (and also understand that overcomingbias is not just eli's blog, i.e. do not comment when you've watched one minute, etc).

it seems to me that the most pregnant part of the diavlog is this part, which is between the pre-chopped segments. twice eli alludes to progress in the AI field, but then john doesn't request an overview, nor does eli begin one on his own. i think that would have been a good use of ten minutes or so, especially since it seems like that's what john wanted to talk about re: skepticism.

i understand from the PDF article posted on the right side that eli is forming policy/philosophy on AI before "superintelligent" AI exists, and there's an analogy made with the first nuclear pile at the university of chicago in there that i thought was quite nice. but the second half of the diavlog would have been more useful if it had begun somewhere like an introduction to AI and then proceeded. coz, like, i gots no idea what AI people are doing, and i would be happy to learn.

Last edited by osmium; 06-07-2008 at 06:47 PM.. Reason: unfortunate misspelling
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-07-2008, 11:58 AM
nojp nojp is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: rochester ny
Posts: 30
Default Horgans point

I think the point is that science and humanity progresses more from basic science and Synchronicity rather than a linear aproach of pulling the future to us.

I.e. most progress penicillian, internet, pcr, dna ,amplification

rather than say the cure fore aids, polio, and the like

this breakthrough will happen by basic science not writing about the future if that is not to course.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-07-2008, 12:16 PM
nojp nojp is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: rochester ny
Posts: 30
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

How long until the turing test is past 10 15 50 100 years.... good god einstein
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-07-2008, 01:29 PM
edbarbar edbarbar is offline
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 71
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

What a lot of fun. I wish we could have heard more from Eli and less from John.

It's funny to hear John think the object is humanity. I don't see it that way. In some sense Chimpanzees created humans, albeit through an evolutionary process. Is the goal of humans to solve chimp issues?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-07-2008, 01:32 PM
Bloggin' Noggin Bloggin' Noggin is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 893
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

This was interesting. I enjoyed it and thank John for bringing Eli on as a guest and doing the interview.
I do wish John would have used his skepticism as a means of finding out more and revealing more to the BloggingHeads audience about Eli's views and the evidence for them than treating his own skepticism as a positive position he himself wanted to establish over Eli's objections.
A better way to say that might be that I wish John didn't confuse skepticism -- a general attitude of mind that believes propositions only in proportion to evidence -- and nay-saying (a definite position on a particular issue).
Don't ask Eli for strong evidence against his own views. Ask him for the best evidence FOR his views. Probe his evidence and see whether ultimately everything is resting on faith -- don't START with accusations that it's all "religious". That's about as illuminating as "have you stopped beating your wife?" Gotcha journalism is pretty useless in politics -- it seems even more out of place in science journalism.

I wish John could overcome his ADD (seemingly a disability afflicting most journalists). Why can't he be a bit more careful in defining his terms (like "religious")? If he has to make an accusation of that sort, why can't he make one accusation at a time, and let his poor interviewee respond? It's conceivable that this style of interviewing yields dividends for John when it is the background of a book, but as a real-time interviewing strategy, it isn't very good -- and in fact it seems more like hostility or lack of concentration than a means of helping your audience understand the interviewee's point of view -- and what may be wrong with that point of view.

Bob Wright and Will Wilkinson are the masters of interviewing on this site (and really they're better than any television interviewer I can think of).

I think Eli did a pretty good job of slowing John down and responding to one thing at a time, but unfortunately, as the interviewee, it wasn't in his power to impose coherence on the discussion as a whole.

P.S. To soften the harshness of my critique, I should say that John is pretty good at interviewing people he's more in sympathy with -- the environmental discussion a month or so ago was really good, as I recall.

Last edited by Bloggin' Noggin; 06-07-2008 at 01:46 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-07-2008, 01:44 PM
piscivorous piscivorous is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,593
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

I agree that this was one of the most disjointed episodes BHTV I have watched. Mr Horgan let his own skepticism and disbeliefs interfere with the flow and direction of the interview. He is not totally at fault in this as Mr. Yudkowsky seemed unable to address, the questions asked, in in direct manner and preferred word craft and word count as a substitute for substance. I am glad that ever time Mr. Yudkowsky tried to go down the path of "well in 10,000 years could you conceive of this happening" which inevitably leads to the well why not 1,000 then why not 500 then why not 100 mind game of gotcha.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 06-08-2008, 01:28 AM
edbarbar edbarbar is offline
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 71
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

I think you missed the point. The 10000 year point is it's hard to imagine it won't happen. That humans will be unable to develop the science to understand the principles and processes behind intelligence. It almost seems to me it takes a leap of faith to believe we can not.

The time scale is really meaningless, and while he put up some youthful optimism about it in his 20 to 50 year projection, I think that was more one of the factors that keeps him personally driven. I suspect if you pressed him he might say, "yeah, maybe it will take 1000 years, but it seems unlikely."

The thing I like about this talk is it brought me to pondering yeah, there will be a time when we are apes among men. This new world might well materialize in my children's lifetime.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 06-07-2008, 10:58 PM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa®ah
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

Thanks for saving me some typing, Bloggin. I pretty much would have said everything you did.

Just to elaborate a little bit:

John -- It's good to be a skeptic, and I don't want you to stop being one. But when a guy sounds this interesting, and clearly appears to have thought as much as he has about his ideas, I wish you would spend a little more time helping him flesh out these ideas before you get to debating them.

Granted, I could read some of his stuff and then more easily appreciate your quickness to disagree on certain points. Probably I will do some reading, and then come back and watch this one again.

It's always hard, I know, to strike the right balance when guessing how much background knowledge an audience brings to the table. All I can say, speaking for myself, is that you may have assumed a little too much this time around.

One more thought from my own perspective: It seemed at first glance that you were rejecting (possibly) new ideas from a perspective that is overly weighted by analogy with past events. Maybe you were right to do so, or maybe you were one of those people who laughed at the Wright brothers by pointing to the previous centuries' worth of failed attempts at flight. Again, always a hard call in these situations, especially given the amount of woo in the world.

No major complaints -- please take this as constructive criticism.
__________________
Brendan
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06-07-2008, 11:37 PM
AemJeff AemJeff is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,750
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

I'll chime in too. I like John - his particular viewpoint is a good counterpoint to my own infatuation with wild, fundamental science. He asks a lot of good questions, and he often rightfully keeps things grounded.

Today, and Eli's protestations to the contrary notwithstanding, I repeatedly wanted to tell him just to let the guy talk. Eli's style of speaking may be somewhat discursive, but he speaks in paragraphs - there's structure to his replies, or so it seems to me. He kept setting up a theme, and before he could get to the point, John would step on his reply. I began to find that frustrating after only a short while.
__________________
-A. E. M. Jeff (Eponym)
Magnets - We know how they work!

Last edited by AemJeff; 06-08-2008 at 12:36 AM.. Reason: reply's -> replies
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06-08-2008, 12:24 AM
Wonderment Wonderment is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,694
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

Quote:
Probe his evidence and see whether ultimately everything is resting on faith -- don't START with accusations that it's all "religious".
I thought -- contrary to everyone else, apparently -- that John did a great job. He did apologize for the "cheap shot" of comparing Singulatarians to Christians.

John has a lot of experience in the debunking business and the interviewing scientists and philosophers business, so I tend to trust where he's trying to go as a journalist and what he's trying to illuminate in the given time limit.

He was obviously getting impatient that the clock was ticking (they went about 10 minutes over the 60-min. mark), and he wanted to get Eli to be a bit more substantive. John had done a lot of homework on the topic and -- rightly, I think -- wanted to get to the core controversial claims.

As for the "religion" charge, John is not entirely off base in calling attention to the quasi-religious, millennial, apocalyptical, messianic tone of some of the literature produced by Singularity writers. It's certainly true of Kurzweil and it's also comes through in the linked writing by Eli (see his speculative musings on how AI may suddenly reconstruct the entire solar system, treating humans as scrap metal).

That said, it's all fascinating stuff, and I enjoy reading and hearing about singularity speculation. A lot of very smart people are hard at work and it will be interesting to see how it all turns out (when I'm 12,000 years old or so).

Quote:
Bob Wright and Will Wilkinson are the masters of interviewing on this site (and really they're better than any television interviewer I can think of).
Hey, what about Carl Zimmer?
__________________
Seek Peace and Pursue it
בקש שלום ורדפהו
Busca la paz y síguela
--Psalm 34:15
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 06-08-2008, 12:49 AM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa®ah
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

Good argument for the other side, Wonderment. And I second your question about Carl Zimmer.
__________________
Brendan
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 06-08-2008, 01:45 AM
edbarbar edbarbar is offline
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 71
Default John Interviews the Wright Brothers

The problem with John's arguments is they are non-substantive. They all had to do with so and so failed. "The Japanese failed." "Brilliant Pebbles failed." "So and so failed."

So what. How many light bulbs did Edison try before he got one that worked? How many people tried flight before the Wright brothers succeeded? Thank goodness there are people like Eli who ignore the John Horgans of the world.

That having been said, no one knows how hard the problem is. Maybe it is a 20 or a 50 year problem. Maybe it is longer. Regardless, it is hard to imagine human beings with their intelligence not solving it in a million years, or even 10000, given where we are today.

The hardware will be there. Silicon is much faster than neurons, with switching speed millions of times faster, and beyond that there are new, potential technologies that are cool and three dimensional. Replicating the compute power of the brain seems quite solvable, more a problem of technology than science.

So it will be a matter of software, and understanding the principles behind intelligence. If you believe the majority of that arose recently, the search space shouldn't be too vast, and the problem will be solved.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 06-07-2008, 02:18 PM
ed fielding ed fielding is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 74
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

Great divalog.

Congratulations to John for responding (however circuitously; I’m a circuitous guy myself) and rising to freshness of expression and productive persistence.

Congratulations to Eli for an admirable exposition of a good mind at work, and his encouragement for the rest of us to go and do likewise.

Hope we get to see and hear more of Eli.

Many thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 06-07-2008, 03:14 PM
themightypuck themightypuck is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pasadena
Posts: 506
Send a message via AIM to themightypuck
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

Horgan blew this one. I wanted to hear what Yudkowsky had to say and he kept getting cut off. Plus Horgan repeated one of the most annoying quotes by a smart person ever "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." There are claims. There is evidence. Once you throw "extraordinary" in there you are in the weeds.

Edit: this isn't to say there isn't strong evidence or weak evidence but my math and statistics skills blow.

Last edited by themightypuck; 06-07-2008 at 05:20 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 06-07-2008, 03:43 PM
ogieogie ogieogie is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 79
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

What a disappointing mess. A fascinating guest--so Horgan interrupts him, insults him, and quibbles around the margins of his ideas, which consequently never get expressed. There was nothing to this diavlog except Horgan making an ass of himself.

So please, I'm begging you, have Elie on again with Bob Wright!
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 06-07-2008, 05:56 PM
StillmanThomas StillmanThomas is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Eugene, OR
Posts: 210
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by ogieogie View Post
What a disappointing mess. A fascinating guest--so Horgan interrupts him, insults him, and quibbles around the margins of his ideas, which consequently never get expressed. There was nothing to this diavlog except Horgan making an ass of himself.
I disagree completely. John is an excellent interviewer, but he's a huge skeptic about science in general and brain science in particular. I think Eli's intelligence is ponderous at best. I also think he was filibustering throughout the conversation, and John was laboring heroically to get him to stay on point. The point being that AI has a long history of inflated hopes and claims, and precious little to show in the asset column.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ogieogie View Post
So please, I'm begging you, have Elie on again with Bob Wright!
I agree that would be interesting.
__________________
Yeah, I know. My name is backwards.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 06-07-2008, 05:29 PM
Wonderment Wonderment is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,694
Default Prediction

As someone who also grew up in Orthodox Judaism (and escaped!), and as a fifth-rate amateur psychoanalyst, I can predict that a boy raised in Orthodox Judaism and obsessing throughout his childhood about the coming of the Messiah and the Messianic Age is likely to secularize and substitute Singularity for Messiah.

Such a person could even keep the rabbinical beard and continue to spend his adult life surrounded by nerdy autodidacts prone to endlessly but brilliantly debating the minutiae of visionary theories that the rest of the world views as esoteric and beyond the comprehension of ordinary folks.

Or... AI could be for real and he could win a Nobel Prize.
__________________
Seek Peace and Pursue it
בקש שלום ורדפהו
Busca la paz y síguela
--Psalm 34:15
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 06-07-2008, 06:23 PM
StillmanThomas StillmanThomas is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Eugene, OR
Posts: 210
Default Singularity Gets Lost in the Weeds

To me, this snippet illustrates the two fatal flaws with the whole singularity concept:

http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/116...2&out=00:05:19

1. "Smarter than human." Human beings have many different types of intelligence. Eli, to me, seems very "intelligent" in a brute force kind of way. He's capable of bringing a lot of gray matter to bear on a problem. But that's not always the best way to solve problems, and indeed, there are many vitally important problems that would be totally opaque to that kind of intelligence. Think of what we face in learning how to cooperate within and across national boundaries to address renewable energy and climate change. With all due respect, I don't think Eli, smart as he is, would have a clue how to address this challenge. It will take all of the different kinds of intelligence we have to fix this: ratiocination, planning, exhorting, compromising, negotiating, and so on.

2. "We won't be able to predict the future." We can't predict the future now. So, predicting the singularity, beyond which we won't be able to predict the future is exactly the kind on inanity to which Eli's "intelligence" leads, IMO. Again, I don't mean to belittle Eli. I'm sure he's absolutely brilliant given a very narrow spectrum of problems.

I do thank both of you for your conversation, and I hope to see Eli back again. John, is a perennial favorite of mine.
__________________
Yeah, I know. My name is backwards.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 06-07-2008, 06:56 PM
EliezerYudkowsky EliezerYudkowsky is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 8
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

I thought I was the one who talked too much.

I also thought that the episode needed to be at least two hours longer to get to the interesting parts.

One question I fumbled was "What's the strongest opposition you've seen to Singularity ideas?" The basic problem is that nearly everyone who attacks the Singularity is either completely unacquainted with the existing thinking, or they just attack Kurzweil's technological determinism. There's no equivalent in Singularity studies of Richard Jones's critique of nanotechnology - which I don't agree with, but at least Jones has read Drexler.

People who don't buy the Singularity don't put in the time and hard work to criticize it properly. This is giving the advocates an unfair advantage!

What I should have done, though, was interpret the question more charitably as "What's the strongest opposition to strong AI or transhumanism?" In which case there's Sir Roger Penrose, Jaron Lanier, Leon Kass, William Hurlbut, and many others. None of these are good arguments - or I would have to accept them! - but at least they are painstakingly crafted arguments, and something like organized opposition.

-- Eliezer Yudkowsky
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 06-07-2008, 07:09 PM
StillmanThomas StillmanThomas is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Eugene, OR
Posts: 210
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

Eliezer:

I can't think of a single instance when a participant in one of these diavlogs posted to the comments section. I'm probably wrong--I've missed more than a few--but I'm sure it's pretty rare. Thanks for your thoughts and participation. Hope to see you back again soon.
__________________
Yeah, I know. My name is backwards.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 06-07-2008, 11:00 PM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa®ah
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bokonon View Post
Eliezer:

I can't think of a single instance when a participant in one of these diavlogs posted to the comments section. I'm probably wrong--I've missed more than a few--but I'm sure it's pretty rare. Thanks for your thoughts and participation. Hope to see you back again soon.
Eli isn't the first diavlogger to jump into the fray, but that doesn't mean he doesn't deserve the shoutout.

Thanks, Eli. What Bokonon said.
__________________
Brendan
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 06-08-2008, 02:15 AM
Happy Hominid Happy Hominid is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: West Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 147
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

What Brendan said.

As big of skeptic as I tend to be, I thought Eliezer made some great points, such as why would you listen to someones optimistic prognostications, be excited, then when it doesn't happen and the person you were listening to becomes disillusioned, you become so also? And, that something failed to materialize is not, in itself, proof that it will fail to materialize.

Further, when you look at the advancement of humankind over the past 500 years, and then try to extrapolate out 1,000 or 5,000 years, it should be obvious that things will be incredibly different and that you probably can't begin to grasp how different it will be. Imagine being of average intelligence in 1508 and trying to contemplate nuclear power, human genomes and robots exploring the surface of Mars. Factor in the exponential growth of information and achievements and project that out to the coming 500 years and you see the problem with discussing these things.

But since this is completely beyond rational discourse, we kind of have to stick to 20-30 years and base our projections on where we are right now. I would accept that we are probably moving faster and doing more than we realize in the field of AI and even that rather short period could end up incredibly different than the world we are in at the moment. A Singularity world? hell, I don't know. I'm just along for the ride and fascinated by each new advance.

I just know that Eliezer has a jug of water that should get him through the next 30 years.
__________________
It's another day in paradise...
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 06-08-2008, 02:38 AM
AemJeff AemJeff is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,750
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Hominid View Post
Further, when you look at the advancement of humankind over the past 500 years, and then try to extrapolate out 1,000 or 5,000 years, it should be obvious that things will be incredibly different and that you probably can't begin to grasp how different it will be. Imagine being of average intelligence in 1508 and trying to contemplate nuclear power, human genomes and robots exploring the surface of Mars. Factor in the exponential growth of information and achievements and project that out to the coming 500 years and you see the problem with discussing these things.
There be dragons. If there's to be a "singularity," extrapolation is meaningless. You can't plot a curve beyond that point, you can't pierce the veil. I haven't read any of Eli's papers (I will soon), but Kurzweil's Utopian fantasy seems a little precious. ("Newcomer to the namespace" - that was delicately put!) The singularity is a scary idea, looming in our possible future, a point at which the rate of change (of what? even that becomes hard to nail down) seemingly becomes infinite - or at least unpredictably nonlinear. -- Our robot overlords may require our body heat to run their civilization; or we all live forever in a virtual paradise, Gods creating new universes in our copious leisure time; or, most likely, something else, about which we don't have the vocabulary or the grammar to even compose descriptive sentences.
__________________
-A. E. M. Jeff (Eponym)
Magnets - We know how they work!

Last edited by AemJeff; 06-08-2008 at 02:57 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 06-08-2008, 02:44 AM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa®ah
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

AemJeff:

Quote:
("Newcomer to the namespace" - that was delicately put!)
Wasn't that outstanding? Totally pinned my geek meter. I love when an insult is constructed so that only those in the know will even be aware that it is one.

Man, I wish I had dingalinked that.
__________________
Brendan
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 06-08-2008, 01:16 PM
themightypuck themightypuck is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pasadena
Posts: 506
Send a message via AIM to themightypuck
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

To be fair. It's been people willing to go where "there be dragons" who have changed the world.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 06-08-2008, 12:58 PM
themightypuck themightypuck is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Pasadena
Posts: 506
Send a message via AIM to themightypuck
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

Thanks for responding Eliezer,

If there was one question that I wanted explored (probably due to my non-scientist status) it is: what is the difference between the uncertainty at t=now and t=singularity?
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 06-08-2008, 11:43 PM
Magic Flea Magic Flea is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 51
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

So here's the thing, Eliezer: If you're in the business of making vague predictions, write horoscopes. A good prediction is *useful* as well as correct, and vaugeness is a pretty big tradeoff for accuracy. (You can't do anything with "I predict something will happen at some future moment.")

Second, you won a debate on points without addressing John's big concern. In the end, I don't think I heard the a scrap of justification for your field of work. It's not like John didn't ask several times and then express urgency that you answer before time runs out.

Then after an hour of evasions, and complaints that John was biased and had been attacking a straw man: Oh, and by the way, I'll put my prediction at 20 to 50 years! Whoa Johnny!

So to Mr. Horgan's point, why are we wasting our energy running down this blind alley, when you can't--in the span of an hour and 10 minutes--make the case that it has any promise or even that there are any legitimate goals in that general direction?


Quote:
Originally Posted by EliezerYudkowsky View Post
People who don't buy the Singularity don't put in the time and hard work to criticize it properly. This is giving the advocates an unfair advantage!
The burden of proof is yours, good sir.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 06-08-2008, 11:50 PM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa®ah
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

Magic Flea:

There's something to your point where you wonder about how well-developed an idea can be if it can't be succinctly stated, but I think you go a little far in your critique. It was my impression that Eli kept trying to explain himself and John kept interrupting him. Now, maybe Eli needs to work on the pithiness, but I'm pretty skeptical about far-out ideas like Teh Singularity, and he definitely had me intrigued.
__________________
Brendan
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 06-07-2008, 07:57 PM
Kevin Kevin is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 84
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wonderment View Post
As someone who also grew up in Orthodox Judaism (and escaped!),...
That is a clever and funny observation, Wonderment.

Generally speaking, it was too bad that they hopped around a lot. I have seen/heard some talks by singularity people, and I have heard some skeptics, (Bruce Sterling's Long Now talk comes to mind, other than JH) but haven't heard a pro and a con get into it with rigor. I wanted to hear more like what Yudkowsky touched on about the rate of change from 1940 to 1970, just as an example-- he has problems with one of the premises, I assume, for talking about the rate of change in the future based on the rate of change in the past, so it would have been nice to hear more with that kind of specificity.

Contrary to Horgan's remark about bloggingheads people having nothing better to do?? Hey, watching this episode was very pragmatic for me, that's why I watched.. because I feel as though I am in mortal danger over the next few years of blowing $100 on protein powder from Ray 'n' Terry's. I always gravitate towards the skeptics of Really Big Changes Pretty Soon, because I recognize that the true believers are seductive and compelling, and I can use all the critiques I can find. Including, more attention on whether futurists have a vested interest (like a nutritional supplements sideline) in generating buzz for their ideas.

It would be very interesting to see John Horgan diavlog Ray Kurzweil, "on the merits", more wonky and in the weeds than this one was.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 06-08-2008, 12:56 AM
Ocean Ocean is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: US Northeast
Posts: 6,784
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

Well, yes, somewhat chaotic... let's look at the bright side: it allows us to do more of the thinking and processing, instead of getting the digested edition.
John was stuck in his skeptical agenda. Eliezer wouldn't get to the point. The bottom line is that experts in AI have to retreat into speculation since they have failed miserably in their attempts to re-create something that doesn't even have a definition. So let's be honest, we still don't know what intelligence is about. Scientists don't agree. There are too many functions that we try to capture with the word "intelligence". And if we decide to throw in concepts such as "wisdom", we'll really get into obscurity. Wisdom includes many processes of synthesis and integration. It includes logic, knowledge, values, appreciation, hierarchies, consensus, common sense... Perhaps we need to consider all the contradictions that are contained in a wise thought. Wisdom is not found in the obvious but in the irony of life. Now go and create software that can imitate that and perhaps we'll have the utopian AI!
And still, I'm hopeful. Just any day...
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 06-08-2008, 01:02 AM
jhorgan jhorgan is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 8
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

I appreciate Elie’s gracious attempt to get me off the hook, but I think my critics have a point (and oh how I hate to say that). My goal in these chats is usually content-directed. In this case, I wanted to introduce people to the Singularity, as represented by Elie, serve up my criticisms, get his responses. But Elie has such an idiosyncratic perspective—he really represents only himself, not any widely held view, and I honestly mean that as a compliment—that I had no chance of achieving my goal. I should have abandoned my script and just let this intelligence-obsessed intelligent person riff. That would have been much more interesting than a half-assed, not-very-informative, quasi-argument about the Singularity. Hey, I’m still trying to get the hang of this Bloggingheads thing, and the biggest challenge for me is finding a balance between eliciting and questioning guests’ views. But I can’t resist making this last obnoxious point to Elie. I think you’re wasting your talents on the Singularity. I predict—I hope--that you move on to other more fruitful obsessions.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 06-08-2008, 01:18 AM
Ocean Ocean is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: US Northeast
Posts: 6,784
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

I would ask the experts: Is there such a thing as "too much intelligence"?

I tend to think that there is. It manifests when an answer to a question gets entangled with so many irrelevant points, that neither the answer nor the point shine through. It is as if the point of wisdom was lost in chaos. I think that both intelligence and wisdom should be crystal clear, like art, to anyone. Yes, I tend to agree with Einstein on that...

John, don't sweat it. You are just fine...
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 06-08-2008, 02:21 AM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa®ah
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

Ocean:

Quote:
I would ask the experts: Is there such a thing as "too much intelligence"?

I tend to think that there is. It manifests when an answer to a question gets entangled with so many irrelevant points, that neither the answer nor the point shine through.
Being neither an expert nor in possession of too much intelligence, I answer anyway.

This'll quickly devolve into semantics, I expect, but I would say, no -- there is no such thing as too much intelligence. By definition, you would not be hampered by irrelevancies if you had enough intelligence. It's sort of like Eli's point about there being no good arguments against what he believes -- if there were, he'd believe them instead.

Now, in a more colloquial sense, I can go along with the familiar image of a person who overthinks a problem -- Jimmy Carter in the White House is the canonical example.* So in this sense, I guess the answer to your question would be yes. But I think you were asking something deeper than that. And in any case, I'd return to my first answer and say that the idea, in my example, that Carter allowed himself to get bogged down in minutiae indicates that he did not have enough (of a certain kind of) intelligence; e.g., he was not smart enough about delegating and prioritizing.

The one case where I could maybe agree that "too much intelligence" might exist would be in some 6-sigma type of person, who sees things so much more clearly than the rest of society that he or she can't get along.

=====================
*Play along here. I'm not claiming this is absolutely true.
__________________
Brendan
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 06-08-2008, 03:02 AM
Ocean Ocean is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: US Northeast
Posts: 6,784
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

The trick in the question is in the "too much" part. "Too much" is always relative to something else and intrinsically subjective.
The solution for the 6-sigma would be to blur his/her vision by wearing the wrong glasses and then get along. I just don't think it would be much fun.

Brendan, I agree with you it is about semantics after all. We make up these words such as "Intelligence" and then we are stuck for great part of the history of humanity trying to figure out what we meant by it! I think we should just drop it and come up with better ones. Unfortunately humankind loves to ruminate about its own creations as if they were real outside one's head. I guess it is the belly button adoration syndrome... Language has allowed so much progress and yet so much confusion...
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 06-08-2008, 01:48 PM
StillmanThomas StillmanThomas is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Eugene, OR
Posts: 210
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

John:

Nice to see you "slumming" here in our comment playground. ;-)

There's an anecdote in an endnote in one of your books about your having to pick up and carry Stephen Hawking at some event. While you were walking, he had difficulty breathing and seemed on the verge of a seizure. You described yourself thinking "Stephen Hawking is going to die in my arms." And then you thought, "What a story!" That was one of the most astonishingly honest moments of self-revelation I've ever encountered!

This capacity for honest self-appraisal, I believe, is what empowers you to walk right along the precipice of skepticism of others. Thanks so much for your wonderful efforts to enlighten and entertain us here on bhtv, John.
__________________
Yeah, I know. My name is backwards.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 06-08-2008, 04:04 PM
Bloggin' Noggin Bloggin' Noggin is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 893
Default Re: Science Saturday: Singularity Edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by jhorgan View Post
But I can’t resist making this last obnoxious point to Elie. I think you’re wasting your talents on the Singularity. I predict—I hope--that you move on to other more fruitful obsessions.

I think it's extremely hard to know ahead of time what will be a waste of time. Even if the Singularity is itself a dead-end, work on the problem need not be wasted. Sir Alexander Fleming wasn't looking for an antibiotic when he discovered penicillin.

What puzzles me in the description of "the Singularity" within the diavlog is the notion that we have much of an ability to predict the future now -- even with merely human intelligences out there making the discoveries.

I guess the future might involve multiple brains linked into one -- but we actually have something like that now -- language, writing, cities, the internet. This system seems in many ways superior to directly linked brains operating as one individual, in that such a multi-brain would presumably have only one perspective, while the current low-tech brain combination methods permit different perspectives to combine in "the wisdom of crowds." If brain linking would preserve the multiple perspectives, then at best it seems like a marginal improvement on what we already have -- and it's not clear how you would introduce the equivalent of peer-review into multiply linked brains. Could you do even as well as peer-review?
Reply With Quote
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.