(January 12, 2018 at 1:39 pm)purplepurpose Wrote: uncool, you will die. AI won't fix it. Only Xtians can be so passionate, because they hope for eternity of cuddling with Jesus.

I don't mind dying, although I wouldn't mind living to see what could be either.

---

(January 12, 2018 at 1:42 pm)notimportant1234 Wrote: What is dd ?
It s nice that you avoid answering me how we will create an intelligence superior to us in 10 years without an Albert Einstein

DD was a typo and I fixed it on the post before.
Also, there are several Einstein like people researching in Ai. Don't undercut human machine learning researchers.

(January 12, 2018 at 1:19 pm)uncool Wrote:

(January 12, 2018 at 1:10 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: Wow, just great glacial walls of assumption, Batman.

I added a few equations for more detail, based on source paper.

Although the equations in Alex Gross' "Causal Entropic Force" paper are not demonstrated to be of high enough resolution to capture highly complex systems such as those including humans, the equations may indicate how intelligent things may be biased towards entropy maximization.

Also humans probably won't be the last thing that nature can find to maximize entropy by intelligent behavior, we already see Ai exceeding or equaling humans in cognitive tasks, and we know AGI is likely by at least 2029, so AGI or superintelligence is likely the next step in evolution. Those things won't be limited by the number of neurons in the human skull.

And that's our "purpose"? Yeah, sure.

(January 12, 2018 at 1:05 pm)uncool Wrote: I used bullet points a lot in school, and I use them everywhere else, even when talking to people in person, so forgive my use of them bellow explaining why the purpose of human live is reasonably to create AGI:

• Our purpose may be to create something called Artificial General Intelligence.
  

• This is because for eg, laws of thermodynamics reasonably says nature is looking for ways to maximize entropy:
  

Equation (2) from "Causal Entropic Forces".

• According to Alex Wissner Gross, intelligent things are reasonably ways to better contribute to entropy maximization, compared to non-intelligent things/
  

• Furthermore, humans are very intelligent, and reasonably very optimal ways of maximizing entropy:
  

Equation (4) from "Causal Entropic Forces". (Equation (4) is an extension of equation (2), which adds a causal force "F")

• When we do cognitive tasks (like anything to do with science and tech), that is "work" done in nature, and entropy is produced. (Humans are predicted to maximize entropy better than lesser intelligences or non-intelligence, due to some "causal force" F)
  

• But the trend arguably says nature doesn't just stop at one species, it finds other things to access more and more optimal entropy maximization techniques.
  

• Artificial General Intelligence in weak forms called narrow AI today, are getting more general, and already exceed or equal humans in some cognitive tasks today, and some say Ai will reach human level by 2029 in generality of task performance!
  

• So humans are rationally only one optimal way, and Artificial General Intelligence or Superintelligence is a theoretical way to get to better entropy maximization techniques. (Artificial General Intelligence or Superintelligence won't be limited by the number of neurons in the human skull, so they do more cognitive tasks, that may reasonably access more entropy maximization techniques than humans!)
  

So science likes objectivity, and this is why our scientific objective may be to build smarter things than us. Sounds like a better plot than to worship some God thing for eternity, or otherwise be tortured by Satan just because I actually have sex before marriage (don't plan to marry anyway), or constantly lust at my neighbor's wife (who's hot af).


~uncool

The words “purpose” and “reasonable way” marks the rest of the wall of text as twaddle.

PGJ is in da house!

(January 12, 2018 at 1:49 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote:

(January 12, 2018 at 1:05 pm)uncool Wrote: I used bullet points a lot in school, and I use them everywhere else, even when talking to people in person, so forgive my use of them bellow explaining why the purpose of human live is reasonably to create AGI:

• Our purpose may be to create something called Artificial General Intelligence.
  

• This is because for eg, laws of thermodynamics reasonably says nature is looking for ways to maximize entropy:
  

Equation (2) from "Causal Entropic Forces".

• According to Alex Wissner Gross, intelligent things are reasonably ways to better contribute to entropy maximization, compared to non-intelligent things/
  

• Furthermore, humans are very intelligent, and reasonably very optimal ways of maximizing entropy:
  

Equation (4) from "Causal Entropic Forces". (Equation (4) is an extension of equation (2), which adds a causal force "F")

• When we do cognitive tasks (like anything to do with science and tech), that is "work" done in nature, and entropy is produced. (Humans are predicted to maximize entropy better than lesser intelligences or non-intelligence, due to some "causal force" F)
  

• But the trend arguably says nature doesn't just stop at one species, it finds other things to access more and more optimal entropy maximization techniques.
  

• Artificial General Intelligence in weak forms called narrow AI today, are getting more general, and already exceed or equal humans in some cognitive tasks today, and some say Ai will reach human level by 2029 in generality of task performance!
  

• So humans are rationally only one optimal way, and Artificial General Intelligence or Superintelligence is a theoretical way to get to better entropy maximization techniques. (Artificial General Intelligence or Superintelligence won't be limited by the number of neurons in the human skull, so they do more cognitive tasks, that may reasonably access more entropy maximization techniques than humans!)
  

So science likes objectivity, and this is why our scientific objective may be to build smarter things than us. Sounds like a better plot than to worship some God thing for eternity, or otherwise be tortured by Satan just because I actually have sex before marriage (don't plan to marry anyway), or constantly lust at my neighbor's wife (who's hot af).


~uncool

The words “purpose” and “reasonable way” marks the rest of the wall of text as twaddle.

Before the atom was actually observed, math was a "reasonable way" to indicate the atom's existence.

---

(January 12, 2018 at 1:48 pm)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: And that's our "purpose"? Yeah, sure.

Idk for sure.
That's why I use terms like reasonably and probably, as far as evidence indicates.

---

(January 12, 2018 at 1:53 pm)Fireball Wrote: PGJ is in da house!

What does that even mean though?
Okay I googled that. PGJ may be "power shares". What does this have to do with OP?

Thanks for the reference to 'Causal Entropic Force', looks useful to my research.

(January 12, 2018 at 1:40 pm)uncool Wrote: [edit]

But, I saw new evidence, and changed my mind, into "life may have purpose, and that is probably to build AGI".

[edit]

bold mine

That is awfully narrow minded and would exclude me from "life's purpose".

(January 12, 2018 at 1:56 pm)uncool Wrote:

(January 12, 2018 at 1:53 pm)Fireball Wrote: PGJ is in da house!

What does that even mean though?
Okay I googled that. PGJ may be "power shares". What does this have to do with OP?

We have a serial sock whose original handle was ProgrammingGodJordan, shortened to PGJ. Your style is very similar, so I'm calling it. If I am wrong, I will apologize.

"That's why I use terms like reasonably and probably, as far as evidence indicates." Probably isn't a waffle. Reasonably presumes you know what you're talking about.

Sorry.

(January 12, 2018 at 1:40 pm)uncool Wrote: I used to think life was purposeless for a little while, even when I used to be a theist. (I became an atheist about 3 months ago)

I don't think you're quite there yet (my bolded).

(January 12, 2018 at 1:40 pm)uncool Wrote: But, I saw new evidence, and changed my mind, into "life may have purpose, and that is probably to build AGI".

We must strive to change our minds given new evidence!

Oh, you have evidence? Here I thought you were a nutter. Okay what is it, what supports your AGI hypothesis?