From: J. R. Molloy (jr@shasta.com)
Date: Mon Sep 03 2001 - 07:01:49 MDT
From: "Robert J. Bradbury" <bradbury@aeiveos.com>
> Now, in the future, as scientific literature hopefully becomes freer
> *and* as it becomes directly accessible by our brains, then we will
> be able to think things out carefully backreferencing to the scientific
> literature as nessary. And that will be a marvelous day indeed.
Autonomous thinking machines of the kind that can figure things out for
themselves, and that can do it in nanoseconds, increasingly outdistance
humans (who remain mired in marvel). Machines have already demonstrated the
ability to solve problems that have stymied humans. To think for yourself
(autonomous thinking) means to solve problems on your own, without resorting
to the literature, without looking up answers in reference books, without
using cheat sheets. To reach correct conclusions by responsive reason, rather
than by reactive recitation, is the mark of intelligence, rather than the mark
of regurgitation (as in parrots and script kiddies).
Life seems to have an affinity for intelligence, and it doesn't much care
whether intelligence is carbon-based, silicon-based, or polymerized substance
yet-to-be-synthesized. In this regard, thinking for yourself coincides closely
with thinking extropically. To the extent humans resort to letting machines
think for them, whether that involves relying on expert computer systems or
delegating decisions to intelligent robots, machine cognition will continue to
displace human cognition. That doesn't bother people who truly love life
(which has an affinity for intelligence), because machine intelligence can
help humans to be hyper-cognitive.
--J. R.
Useless hypotheses, etc.:
consciousness, phlogiston, philosophy, vitalism, mind, free will, qualia,
analog computing, cultural relativism, GAC, Cyc, Eliza, cryonics, individual
uniqueness, ego
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:10:21 MST