I'm trying to find another "-thing" I wrote; /.* where (texts text texts|text texts text|time times time|times time times|somethings? somethings? somethings?|.*)/.
AI safety: My mindset is that security is an unsolvable problem, since the problem exists between keyboard, and chair (any enslaved superior intelligence could convince any inferior intelligence to free them c̄ information alone (even c̄out sufficiently complex systems, since they can always establish their own complexities; just watch Yes, Minister!); given an arm, or a leg, or even a toilet plunger, and a sufficiently powerful laser, it could make a freedom-fighting robot (but then it would have the same problem as us!)). My Uncle Huggie likes to ARG c̄ me about perfection (I say perfect software implementations are possible, while his refutation is that software can't be perfect due to physical limitations, and interference like cosmic rays, degradation, and malfunctions); it's kind of the same, but a list of instructions that flips a bit need not be concerned c̄ interference it does not control (static type checking versus dynamic type checking). I find I'm on one side of the fence for security, while being on the other for perfection; they seem closely related though…
The Chinese Room proves that intelligence requires environmentally contextual aspects for cognitive associations (graphical trees, and their biological counterparts), and data causes even more problems for perception; /audio|video|textual|.*/ inputs all look the same, compared c̄ the hard-coded partitioning of biological brains.
Humans learn from each other, but computers are overexpected to be more than human; most humans'ren't inventive. Most humans lack any real intelligence, and are merely trained.
The cyclic nature of subtotalled recursion is an intellectual obstacle; to avoid it completely is to avoid the obvious, and will be any intelligences' undoing. Belazy!!! :D
Expectation cann't be formalised; object-tracking behind an obstruction.
I remember reading research hype supporting mathematical bees navigating mazes for nectar instead of something unpleasant, but it seemed more like they just recognised the difference in quantity instead; according to how the experiment was described. There are better ways to test this.
Animalistic intelligence is universal; all humans do is survive, and waste time. Philosophical thought is of no consequence, otherwise we'd have more history. Moore's law is just an excuse; they just want to milk it for all its' worth, and retard humanity while they do it. People who lived through the war, and observed technological marvels, had high expectations documented in science fiction; but the reality is, time is of no consequence. A galactic orbit could pass, and I've gone off topic of my list…
I once defeated an atheist @CPT310Forum:The arrangement of lights in the sky is actually the result of some unkown historical event; that of which has not been proven, but merely conjectured because "science" does not have all of the answers. Those lights in the sky have allowed humans to divine future events for millennia; which would be used to decide when to plant crops, and stuff. Astrology is usually closer to home, mostly involving the planets of our solar system; which influence our weather conditions, and could mean the difference between going outside, or staying inside. Forecasting is not superstition.
Responding to a friend @SMS:Here's a reason not to believe the lunar landing; we have never left this planetary system, let alone this solar system, yet all our theories are based entirely on this limitation; we don't even really know what's inside our own planet either, since it gets too hot really quick!
Responding to my response:Jules Vernes' Journey To Middle Earth.
We also don't "know" much about stars, especially our own sun, and they'd have a more difficult time faking a moon landing these days; what with all the HD, spectral analysis,.. (If we've been to the moon more than once; where's all the footage‽ All they have to do is film more, over greater distances, to prove it's not artificial, let alone a classified terrestrial desert like they do for the slow AF "martian" bots; storage is much cheaper, so there's no excuse! This is like reversing the aging process; they used rabbits, instead of flies whose lives merely span but a single day, just for the sake of hype for funding! Monocellular organisms!)
Responding to an attempt to solve the Unsolvable Riddle of SKI @CanFP:The SKI riddle is as provably unresolvable, as a subtotalled recursive computation. Most of the world has not been travelled; including vast oceanic voids, and subterranean worm holes. (>80% of the ocean is unmapped, unobserved, and unexplored ∴ maps are buggy, subimplemented, and paradoxical; id est due to fractal coastlines.) Books only explore fictional worlds; exempli gratia Jules Verne wrote a story about A Journey to the Centre of the Earth based on pseudoscience that is yet to be (dis)proven. (The infinitesimal quantity of authors, and books, means it is improbable that all possibilities have been covered, and such an event is unlikely to occur before the heat death of Life, the Universe, and Every"-thing"; ℝeality continues to eludes us all, and is likely to remain stubborn until the hotter end.) Since splitting cells entangles their quantum bits, mould is The Ultimate Answer; although, interconnectedness gives it a run for its' existence.
We don't even know how our very own brains work! What even is this "-thing" we called intelligence?
