On 06/12/2014 01:56 PM, Nathanael Ries wrote:
We don't have to be smarter than ourselves to create something smarter
than ourselves. Quarks don't need to be smart to make hydrogen atoms,
and hydrogen atoms don't need to be smart to make stars which create the
elements. Those elements don't need to be smart to make organic
molecules and so on and so forth. We only need to be smart enough to
copy what nature has already done on its own.
On Jun 12, 2014 1:52 PM, "Chris McQuistion" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I don't think we're intelligent enough to invent something more
intelligent than ourselves.
I do believe we're intelligent to invent something that
/mimics/ some of the things that the human mind can do, but it is
just mimicking and it will never be able to do everything our mind
can do because even we can't fully understand the human mind.
Chris
Allow me to restate Chris' double negative - we are not intelligent
enough to invent something more intelligent than ourselves.
Our lack of intelligence may be the problem precisely. Nuclear weapons
spring to mind. Unintended consequences and all of that...
Worse, we may not be intelligent enough to know the difference.
Howard
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"NLUG" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/nlug-talk?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "NLUG" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
