• Aneb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    21 hours ago

    I’m not trying to grade on potential but betting on human potential vs AI potential feels like it rewards ourselves for being better vs a machine. Would we have Albert Einstein if we didn’t have Isaac Newton?

    • applebusch@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 hours ago

      That’s kind of a false dichotomy. They may be separate today, but there’s no reason to believe we won’t augment human minds with artificial neural networks in the future. Not in the magical cure all fix all way techbros like to sell it, but for like really boring and mundane things initially. Think replacing a small damaged part of some brain region, like the visual or auditory cortexes, to repair functional deficiencies. Once they get the basic technology worked out to be reliable, repeatable, and not require too much maintenance (cough subscriptions and software licenses), there’s no reason to believe we won’t progress rapidly to other augmentations and improvements. A simple graphical interface for like a heads up display or a simple audio interface for direct communications both come to mind, but I’m sure our imaginations will be comically optimistic about some things and comically pessimistic about others. All that to say that any true AI potential will be human potential in time. We won’t stop at making super intelligent AGI. We will want to BE super intelligent AGI. Since we already know highly efficient and capable intelligence is possible (see yourself) it’s only a matter of time until we make it ourselves, provided we don’t kill ourselves somehow along the way.