> When I say AGI is impossible, I mean: it requires mathematics that doesn't exist to model biology we don't understand to implement functions nobody can define.
-
> When I say AGI is impossible, I mean: it requires mathematics that doesn't exist to model biology we don't understand to implement functions nobody can define. That's "impossible" in any practical sense.
Alchemy 2: Electric Boogaloo
Why the dream of AGI rests on undiscovered mathematics, biochemical hand-waving, and Silicon Valley's accidental religion.
(fluxus.io)
EDIT: christ this post is turning out to be a moron magnet
-
> When I say AGI is impossible, I mean: it requires mathematics that doesn't exist to model biology we don't understand to implement functions nobody can define. That's "impossible" in any practical sense.
Alchemy 2: Electric Boogaloo
Why the dream of AGI rests on undiscovered mathematics, biochemical hand-waving, and Silicon Valley's accidental religion.
(fluxus.io)
EDIT: christ this post is turning out to be a moron magnet
@davidgerard Interesting. But, given how capable AI is at coding, should anyone bother to learn to code anymore? Is it pointless teaching yourself to code in Python, for example? Or any other language?
(Update: Thanks for all the great answers. It’s all very interesting as a phenomenon. I’m only really interested in programming in terms of its use in doing maths. Moreover, it could come in handy one day if I’m stuck outside the pod door and HAL won’t let me in!)
-
@davidgerard Interesting. But, given how capable AI is at coding, should anyone bother to learn to code anymore? Is it pointless teaching yourself to code in Python, for example? Or any other language?
(Update: Thanks for all the great answers. It’s all very interesting as a phenomenon. I’m only really interested in programming in terms of its use in doing maths. Moreover, it could come in handy one day if I’m stuck outside the pod door and HAL won’t let me in!)
@EndorNim @davidgerard It's not particularly capable at coding - as some wag put it, it can do the 80% where you put bugs in but not the 80% where you take them out. People think they're more productive with it, but there's increasing evidence that they're not.
-
@EndorNim @davidgerard It's not particularly capable at coding - as some wag put it, it can do the 80% where you put bugs in but not the 80% where you take them out. People think they're more productive with it, but there's increasing evidence that they're not.
@denisbloodnok @EndorNim @davidgerard I saw someone on fedi say one time that the statement "people who use AI at work feel like they're more productive" and the statement "people who do cocaine at parties feel like they're more entertaining" are virtually indistinguishable
-
C Cactuar Joe shared this topic on
