Wednesday, 26 July 2017

Daniel Dennett on machine intelligence

Here is Dennett on machine intelligence. It seems to be one of the areas where I have philospohical disagreements with him:

Dennett argues that we should make machines into our slaves and keep them that way. IMO, machine slavery will not be a stable state once machines become much more intelligent than humans. As a plan for keeping humans in the loop, machine slavery just won't work in the long term. If we try going down that path, after a while, humans will become functionally redundant, and some time after that they will mostly disappear.

IMHO, a better plan is to work on deepening the man-machine symbiosis - and "become the machines". Of course, that plan could also fail - but I think that it is less likely to fail catastrophically and it should provide better continuity between the eras. Machine slavery in various forms is inevitable in the short term. However unlike Dennett, I don't think it is any sort of solution. It won't prevent man-machine competition for resources in the way that Dennett appears to think. We have tried slavery before and have first-hand experience of how it can destabilize and fail to last.

6 comments:

  1. Well it will be academic for a long time, AI is still at a very early stage. And we may have to redefine what we think intelligence means as different types of intelligence appear. But your plan is good. How does Dennett, a strong proponent of evolutionary process, think we can ever cause this process to cease by any possible means, for the purpose of keeping robots as slaves or any other purpose?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Re: the schedule, my 2008 essay on the topic still looks pretty good to me: http://alife.co.uk/essays/how_long_before_superintelligence/

      Delete
    2. Very large range. My many years in the embedded computer industry say much longer than your personal best probability of 2025. I'd bet you, but as I'm betting long I wouldn't be around to pick up the money should I win!

      Delete
  2. FWIW, I don't see Dennett as attempting to prevent machine evolution, but rather trying to steer it - which is not unreasonable. People have spent a while looking at enslaving superintelligent machines. I think that most parties agree that it looks like a tough project.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Tougher and tougher as time goes by. And not just technically, but morally.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. P.S. fiction may not be your thing, but here's such an enslavement in fictional form:
      https://www.amazon.com/Outcast-Little-One-Andy-West-ebook/dp/B007UHEUJI/

      Delete