“They saw their injured country's woe;
The flaming town, the wasted field;
Then rushed to meet the insulting foe;
They took the spear, - but left the shield.”
―Philip Freneau
Friday, April 4, 2025
Lee Cronin On Why AI Doesn't Stand a Chance..
Excerpt:
What Burgson said...actually I like it a lot because Instinct going into cognition gives you intuition. Intuition is the thing that you can't yet put into language very well, you haven't got there, but you've got this thing right?
I wanna say it here. Even thought it will be prone to misunderstanding and/or misreading intention.
>>>> I. Actually. Appreciate your tryes to establish communication YOUR WAY. <<<<
It's just... I am not very experienced and not very capable, it seems, to pull it up from my side.
Like for example, with that Assembly Theory.
Even though I gave my short remark "BS". It actually doesn't mean that I disregard or trying to deminish other people valiant attempts to understand things.
It's just, it would demand such elaborate explanation (like this one) that I percieve as only diming and not shining light.
With hope that my "Yawn"s and "BS"s understood by you at least partially correct.
Again. With Assembly Theory as example.
Even if that theory viable. Or even precisely correct. It would need tons of heavy lifting. In engineering.
Like that Einstain's formula -- E = mc^2, simple isn't it? But it needed whole Manhattan Project to accomplish.
I think it's important to understand the route biology took before attempting to develop a non-biological mechanical equivalent going forward. If self-assembly is going to be required, this needs to be established at the foundational level. Eukaryotes with Archeae accompanied with a foundational algorithm
...because the competencies at each level of assembly need to be retained, and communications between levels established... like at Lumon (Severance)... Outtie level -> Innie Level -> Gemma Level (25 rooms)
Every room is concentrated upon another but different "problem" to be solves (and tested)
Every assembly a "desiring" machine, every desiring machine addressing the problem it needs ( & desires) to solve. Every desiring machine given the information and tools needed to solve the problem, and every desiring machine communicating its' desires (and frustration- aka distress) to symbiotic desiring machines that can understand and respond (or not) to that distress.
No, the turning of a 30,000 year Dark Age into a 1,000 year dark age. A form of "accelerationism".
The Seldon Plan was the plan engineered by Hari Seldon, Yugo Amaryl, Wanda Seldon, and many other members of the Seldon Project to shorten a projected thirty thousand years of chaos and war following the inevitable collapse of the Galactic Empire to a mere thousand years, leading to the establishment of a Second Empire
...as if technology isn't accelerating fast enough (Toffler, "Future Shock")
Evolution has saved the answers to 2 billion years of encountered problems in our DNA. Why would you believe that replicating the properties of life mechanically or with AI would be simple? Yes, the "end algorithm" seems simple enough "persist and replicate", but it took billions of failed "Manhattan projects" to accomplish... and only one has reached the language of an LLM level. It wasn't a goal. It wasn't a purpose. It "emerged" as a solution to a "specific" problem to a "particular" set of limitations. It was one (of possibly many) solutions.
The "desires" of both machines being complimentary, attract each other... and then live together to answer the challenges the the individual machines could not surpass individually.
Yep... but Engineering is also "blind" to solutions not previously explored through Theoretical Science and Applied experimentation. Theoretical Physics-Applied Physics-Engineering. Epimetheus' 3 blind mice.
It's hard to sell a "purposeless" design effort, easy to sell one 'with" a purpose. The former is also much more dangerous, as you can't be sure that your "purposeless purpose" will be fulfilled in any expected fashion. Especially if they self-assemble and form larger IIT groupings (von Neuman machine)
ps - the ability to store memories in stone/ architecture/ writing outside of ourselves has only existed for a few thousand years (since cave and rock art). It's going to take time. Media will evolve as technology evolves. So will Transhumanism.
Focus on "What" and "How" Non-teleological thinking focuses on the "what" and "how" of things, rather than the "why". It emphasizes observation, description, and understanding the immediate reality, rather than searching for ultimate causes or purposes.
Is yours a "purposeless" design, or one that wishes to impose a "purpose"?
Ha-ha-ha-ha!
ReplyDelete:)
ReplyDeleteGot transhumanism?
ReplyDeleteI wanna say it here. Even thought it will be prone to misunderstanding and/or misreading intention.
ReplyDelete>>>> I. Actually. Appreciate your tryes to establish communication YOUR WAY. <<<<
It's just... I am not very experienced and not very capable, it seems, to pull it up from my side.
Like for example, with that Assembly Theory.
Even though I gave my short remark "BS". It actually doesn't mean that I disregard or trying to deminish other people valiant attempts to understand things.
It's just, it would demand such elaborate explanation (like this one) that I percieve as only diming and not shining light.
With hope that my "Yawn"s and "BS"s understood by you at least partially correct.
Again. With Assembly Theory as example.
Even if that theory viable. Or even precisely correct. It would need tons of heavy lifting. In engineering.
Like that Einstain's formula -- E = mc^2, simple isn't it? But it needed whole Manhattan Project to accomplish.
No comments on this?
DeleteYou still ignoring or dislike my attempts to establish meta-communication. Why?
I think it's important to understand the route biology took before attempting to develop a non-biological mechanical equivalent going forward. If self-assembly is going to be required, this needs to be established at the foundational level. Eukaryotes with Archeae accompanied with a foundational algorithm
DeleteThat, and knowledge of integrated Information theory (IIT) to build "collective" intelligences.
Delete...because the competencies at each level of assembly need to be retained, and communications between levels established... like at Lumon (Severance)... Outtie level -> Innie Level -> Gemma Level (25 rooms)
DeleteEvery room is concentrated upon another but different "problem" to be solves (and tested)
Every assembly a "desiring" machine, every desiring machine addressing the problem it needs ( & desires) to solve. Every desiring machine given the information and tools needed to solve the problem, and every desiring machine communicating its' desires (and frustration- aka distress) to symbiotic desiring machines that can understand and respond (or not) to that distress.
DeleteSo many rooms... so many problems to solve and coordinate.
Delete"Doing something again and again without succes is definition..."
DeleteSo instead of complaining about a need for smooth surfaces you should embrace a few striations... ;p Meden agan!
DeleteCapitalism:Schizophrenia
Evolution will get there eventually! :P
Delete...even without the Seldon Plan.
DeleteEmbrace quilting... not embroidery. It doesn't have to be as perfect.
DeleteSeldon Plan -- made by Evolution.
DeleteYawn.
No, the turning of a 30,000 year Dark Age into a 1,000 year dark age. A form of "accelerationism".
DeleteThe Seldon Plan was the plan engineered by Hari Seldon, Yugo Amaryl, Wanda Seldon, and many other members of the Seldon Project to shorten a projected thirty thousand years of chaos and war following the inevitable collapse of the Galactic Empire to a mere thousand years, leading to the establishment of a Second Empire
...as if technology isn't accelerating fast enough (Toffler, "Future Shock")
Hoe long ago you have had to buy new computer, because your current +- not fast enoigh???
DeleteTechnological progress practically stopped already, dude.
DeleteWe ARE in a Dark Age.
Current wars show it with impunity -- they fought with 40-50 years old weapon
lol! We need faster and faster computers because the code gets ever sloppier and less efficient.
DeleteBlame the slow development on copyright and patent law. Only in "war" do those restrictions go out the window and innovators go full Shanzhai!
Did you run that through an LLM?
ReplyDeleteEvolution has saved the answers to 2 billion years of encountered problems in our DNA. Why would you believe that replicating the properties of life mechanically or with AI would be simple? Yes, the "end algorithm" seems simple enough "persist and replicate", but it took billions of failed "Manhattan projects" to accomplish... and only one has reached the language of an LLM level. It wasn't a goal. It wasn't a purpose. It "emerged" as a solution to a "specific" problem to a "particular" set of limitations. It was one (of possibly many) solutions.
//Did you run that through an LLM?
DeleteWhat for?
To recieve Artifical Stupidity?)))
And. Yap.
You paraphrasing exactly my criticizm of Assembly Theory -- that that is engineering task, not theory building. ;-)
No, it's an argument for serendipity... and fortuitous combinations that build incrementally one upon the other.
DeleteThe "desires" of both machines being complimentary, attract each other... and then live together to answer the challenges the the individual machines could not surpass individually.
DeleteSymbiosis (Mutualism, Commensalism, and Parasitism)
Delete...or amensalism
Deleteor predation.
Delete...elements of Fight, f*ck, or eat
Delete//No, it's an argument for serendipity...
DeleteIs it?
//build incrementally one upon the other.
Looks like definition of engineering to me. ;-)
Nope. Science. Engineering is science through a rear-view mirror.
DeleteEpimetheus' brain, NOT Prometheus'.
Delete:P
DeleteProphets... Seers... Pre-Cogs.
Delete//Nope. Science. Engineering is science through a rear-view mirror.
DeleteMore like left and right hand. IMHO
Yep... but Engineering is also "blind" to solutions not previously explored through Theoretical Science and Applied experimentation. Theoretical Physics-Applied Physics-Engineering. Epimetheus' 3 blind mice.
DeleteYeah.
DeleteAnd there is no crazy inventors with their crazy inventions.
Bu-ga-ga-h!
Thnx in advance)))
...not ones with "funding", anyways... ;p
DeleteYeah.
DeleteThrow some more salt... into my bleeding injury. %)
It's hard to sell a "purposeless" design effort, easy to sell one 'with" a purpose. The former is also much more dangerous, as you can't be sure that your "purposeless purpose" will be fulfilled in any expected fashion. Especially if they self-assemble and form larger IIT groupings (von Neuman machine)
DeleteYou really need to go to MIT and explore your ideas.
DeleteCuz "research" is saleable.
DeleteYeah. Easier to say than done.
DeleteMake a friend at MIT... and collaborate.
Deleteps - the ability to store memories in stone/ architecture/ writing outside of ourselves has only existed for a few thousand years (since cave and rock art). It's going to take time. Media will evolve as technology evolves. So will Transhumanism.
ReplyDeleteBS.
DeleteIt need Conscious Efforts.
Will not happen by itself.
Success often defies conscious efforts. Only time can reveal the "fittest" answers.
Delete"Engineered" or pure "Chance".
DeleteA system of chemical bonds, or an animal "instinct", or an animal's learning from an environment.
DeleteAgain. I see no contradictions with what I was saying...
DeleteOnly you seek to impose an outsider's perceived solution on an insider's real problems.
Delete...and you have no idea what those problems (plural) really are.
Delete//Only you seek to impose an outsider's perceived solution on an insider's real problems.
DeleteAm I?
Does it take into account all the insider's desires? Or only yours?
DeleteWhat "it"?
DeleteSorry for such questions, but I really bewildered.
"Your solution"... (substitute for "it" above)
DeleteEhm???
DeleteWhat "my solution"???
Am I some politician???%)))
I just see a way to solve this or that problem.
That's all.
...and what if the problem is non-teleological?
DeleteFocus on "What" and "How"
DeleteNon-teleological thinking focuses on the "what" and "how" of things, rather than the "why". It emphasizes observation, description, and understanding the immediate reality, rather than searching for ultimate causes or purposes.
Is yours a "purposeless" design, or one that wishes to impose a "purpose"?
More then Evolition ALREADY imposed on us? ;-P
DeleteYou mean doing what Gershenfeld says, building the software into the hardware materials and not separately?
Delete...firmware without the "burner", with embedded code naturally forming when the PROM is fabricated
DeleteLee Cronin is probably the best thing that's come out Little Britain in a while. He should not go back ;-)
ReplyDeleteYou chemists need to stick together. ;)
Delete