Richard Loosemore:> I am not sure I understand.> > There is every reason to think that "a currently-envisionable AGI would > be millions of times "smarter" than all of humanity put together."> > Simply build a human-level AGI, then get it to bootstrap to a level of, > say, a thousand times human speed (easy enough: we are not asking for > better thinking processes, just faster implementation), then ask it to > compact itself enough that we can afford to build and run a few billion > of these systems in parallel This viewpoint assumes that human intelligence is essentially trivial; I see no evidence for this and tend to assume that a properly-programmed gameboy is not going to pass the turing test. I realize that people on this list tend to be more optimistic on this subject so I do accept your answer as one viewpoint. It is surely a minority view, though, and my question only makes sense if you assume significant limitations in the capability of near-term hardware.
------------------------------------------- singularity Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/11983/=now RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/11983/ Modify Your Subscription: http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=4007604&id_secret=98631122-712fa4 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
