The abstract doesn't say anything about consciousness. On Wed, Feb 5, 2020, 7:16 AM John Rose <[email protected]> wrote:
> See this really reinforces my beliefs; multiple wetware general > intelligences discussing the compression of a particular chunk of data > (enwik8), an example in classical communication complexity. My belief is > that conscious agents compress better than non-conscious agents and are > capable of more intelligence. To me it's obvious. > > I wonder if this paper, if the proof is peer verified of MIP*=RE > https://arxiv.org/abs/2001.04383 and according to Scott Aaronson would > prove "There is a protocol by which two entangled provers can convince a > polynomial-time verifier of the answer to any computable problem whatsoever > (!!), or indeed that a given Turing machine halts." and if human > consciointelligence has some form of entanglement that affects the quantum > and classical information complexity gap related to quantum and classical > communication complexity on a protocol fabric, IOW, consciousness, might be > evidence in that direction. > *Artificial General Intelligence List <https://agi.topicbox.com/latest>* > / AGI / see discussions <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi> + > participants <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/members> + delivery > options <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription> Permalink > <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T409fc28ec41e6e3a-Mbad3f773673d8b637da60a77> > ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T409fc28ec41e6e3a-M0696acf1e60bc7e693a5f7c1 Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
