X-Message-Number: 25533
From: 
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 12:44:44 EST
Subject: tail of the curve

Richard B.R. writes in part:
 

>The  development of so-called general-purpose AI will be great for 
>creating  believable computer characters. However, it won't solve 
>any  significant problems whatsoever, and it will have only a 
>slightly  broader range of applications than humans themselves

 
I think he is missing something here, or let's call it two things:
 
1. There is only a relatively tiny difference between apes and humans, yet  
humans have immensely greater effective abilities than apes. There is  also a 

biologically tiny difference between geniuses and idiots among humans,  but the
geniuses can accomplish immensely more. The normal curve of distribution  of 
intelligence means that a small displacement of the mean results in a huge  
difference, percentagewise, in the number of geniuses or idiots.
 
2. RBR says, roughly, that humans are pretty bad at everything (compared to  
special purpose machines) because they are general-purpose. But some  

"idiot-savants" can do amazing machine-like cognition, which proves that their  
degree 
of mastery would be relatively easy for everyone to attain eventually. If  
some have already done it, how hard can it be?
 
In other words, RBR says that general AI machines would have "only a  

slightly broader range of applications than humans themselves." If that were  
true, 
it would imply that any one human could have at most only a  slightly broader 
range of abilities than any other, or than any ape for  that matter. But we 
know that is not the case. Even "small" changes can make big  differences.
 
Robert Ettinger 


 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=25533