[p2p-research] Drone hacking

[Ryan Lanham]

On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 5:01 PM, Tere Vadén <tere.vaden at uta.fi> wrote:

>
> Or then it may not. Given current knowledge, it is possible - indeed the
> 'received' view in the physics community, the Copenhagen interpretation -
> that individual quantum phenomena are genuinely random. It is also possible
> that there are quantum phenomena that are relevant for the functioning of
> the human nervous system (e.g., the retina reacts to a single photon;
> exocytosis relies on quantum tunneling, etc.). If these quantum phenomena
> have some cognitive/experiental relevance (and there is very little reason
> to say that they don't, if we already accept that the nervous system and
> cognition are somehow coupled), then there is a very natural way that
> genuine randomness may be a part of human cognition/experience, and also
> behaviour.
>
>
No more so than a quantum computer.  If humans are desirably random, so then
can be machines.

The game here isn't to copy people.  That's pretty uninteresting after a
point--if that were a goal, cloning would be a better path.

The game is to surpass humans. Humanity 2.0.   To reason better, faster,
with more insight, knowledge brought to bear, etc.  I would be totally
disappointed if the best AI can do in 100 years is to mimic humans.  The
place to start is with understanding if "intelligence" is compute feasible.
So far, it appears to be so.  If it is, copying humans is about like copying
the human DNA...yes yours is different and mine, but knowing a whole
sequence and being able to search it and analyze it is a huge leap forward.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20091222/19797e44/attachment.html>