Hi Fergal,

Wow. You really thought I jumped all over him? I really thought I
approached the topic in a totally non-provocative manner! I just meant to
inform - that is all, and I thought I did that in a very non-imposing way
(apart from some of my other more recent communications) :-)

David

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Mike Albanese <
[email protected]> wrote:

>  And don't get me started on that Jade Helm stuff or the black helicopters
> or terror babies.
>
>
>
> On 5/25/2015 9:26 AM, Fergal Byrne wrote:
>
> Hi David,
>
>  It's also not a good idea to jump all over people who are just trying to
> get their heads round something and get it wrong (this I know because I do
> that too often as well). If you're trying to help someone understand
> something, almost always the wrong way to begin is by attacking their
> current understanding. It just makes them defensive.
>
>  This does not apply to people who claim to know plenty about a subject.
> So, for example, when I claim to KNOW that prediction MUST precede
> recognition, I'm actually demanding attacks on that idea. I want to be
> certain in a scientific sense, and the best way is to invite smart people
> to try and prove me wrong. The "worst case" scenario is I am proven wrong
> in my original idea, but we now know why. That will always lead to
> something better.
>
>  Now, when asked again and again about these fears coming from highly
> regarded authorities in other fields, Jeff understandably treats the
> question in a certain way. Instead of discussing "how" we can do this
> (Jeff's lifelong quest), this is a completely different question about
> what'll happen if we do it and we mess up the deployment. It is an
> important question, but it's not what Jeff is interested in. It's hard
> enough to get anywhere near there, and then it's even harder to make a
> smart computer dangerous. It's much easier to give the dangerous powers to
> bad people than it is to build a smart computer and make it bad and then
> give it the power to be dangerous. So it's in a certain sense a really
> stupid question. People who are scared of the possibility of dangerous AI
> should spend their time figuring out how to keep power away from bad
> intelligences, regardless of their substrate.
>
>  Clearly, as history shows, we're much worse at this than we are at
> developing potentially destructive technologies. AI's are hardly likely to
> make that less true.
>
>  (I wrote this before the video was linked to, so I'll send this and then
> watch that - on my phone which can't do both).
>
>  Cheers
>
>  Fergal
>
> --
>
> Fergal Byrne, Brenter IT
>
> Author, Real Machine Intelligence with Clortex and NuPIC
> https://leanpub.com/realsmartmachines
>
> Speaking on Clortex and HTM/CLA at euroClojure Krakow, June 2014:
> http://euroclojure.com/2014/
> and at LambdaJam Chicago, July 2014: http://www.lambdajam.com
>
> http://inbits.com - Better Living through Thoughtful Technology
> http://ie.linkedin.com/in/fergbyrne/ - https://github.com/fergalbyrne
>
> e:[email protected] t:+353 83 4214179
> Join the quest for Machine Intelligence at http://numenta.org
> Formerly of Adnet [email protected] http://www.adnet.ie
>
>
>  On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 5:04 PM, cogmission (David Ray) <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>>  This was someone's response to Jeff's interview (see here:
>> https://www.facebook.com/fareedzakaria/posts/10152703985901330)
>>
>>  Please read and comment if you feel the need...
>>
>>  Cheers,
>> David
>>
>>  --
>>      *With kind regards,*
>>
>> David Ray
>>  Java Solutions Architect
>>
>> *Cortical.io <http://cortical.io/>*
>>  Sponsor of:  HTM.java <https://github.com/numenta/htm.java>
>>
>> [email protected]
>>  http://cortical.io
>>
>
>
>


-- 
*With kind regards,*

David Ray
Java Solutions Architect

*Cortical.io <http://cortical.io/>*
Sponsor of:  HTM.java <https://github.com/numenta/htm.java>

[email protected]
http://cortical.io

Reply via email to