In two months following our conversation in this white paper you can now find answers to all you questions and the roadmap of AGI development based of the first principle of SBI https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.01354
Thank you very much. I understand that you are helping me and appreciate it very much.
The point that I failed to make clear in the paper is that I'm not telling, "Look, here are brains in a dish playing pong and it's cool."
I'm trying to tell that there's a mathematical algorithm that enables dishbrains to learn. Dishbrains just prove that the algorithm works with natural neurons embedded in digital environment. We can now use this algorithm to make both biological synthetic organisms and machines which will be sentient and able to talk to each other and to natural organisms in the same language.
There will be different technological hurdles depending on the substrate and the goal chosen but there are no more fundamental understanding problems which blocked the development of DNA based computer and block now the quantum computer development as well.
There are several labs lead by passionate scientists which work on SBI for many years. Fortune-hunters are joining the gang as they smell success. That's the situation right now
The reason why I believe SBI is seminal is that it proves that natural neural networks and even single cells, not necessarily neurons, behave in accordance with clearly defined mathematical rules, which enable us to (a) predict and program the behaviour and morphogenesis of living tissue, organs and organisms, (b) to create synthetic forms of life (minds) which never exist, (c) create mathematical, in silica and other substrate based minds which will perform like or better than biological ones, (d) integrate seamlessly all SBIs across the entire array of substrates.
All these things can be done by scientists in labs or by SBI itself as it evolves if we allow it to do it.
Active inference theory and minds everywhere framework based on it both show that there is no such thing as unintelligent life. All life forms, organs, and even single cells have intelligence on a spectrum.
I don't know how to better estimate the probability. SBI is here. Its probability is 1.
You are right. Early Pavlov's ideas of stimulus-response learning and conditioning were not ignored. I had to be more specific that the latest idea of Pavlov about stimulus-stimulus learning was ignored. I'm working on a short paper that will summarise the book's findings and will try to be more clear in it
In two months following our conversation in this white paper you can now find answers to all you questions and the roadmap of AGI development based of the first principle of SBI https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.01354
Thank you very much. I understand that you are helping me and appreciate it very much.
The point that I failed to make clear in the paper is that I'm not telling, "Look, here are brains in a dish playing pong and it's cool."
I'm trying to tell that there's a mathematical algorithm that enables dishbrains to learn. Dishbrains just prove that the algorithm works with natural neurons embedded in digital environment. We can now use this algorithm to make both biological synthetic organisms and machines which will be sentient and able to talk to each other and to natural organisms in the same language.
There will be different technological hurdles depending on the substrate and the goal chosen but there are no more fundamental understanding problems which blocked the development of DNA based computer and block now the quantum computer development as well.
There are several labs lead by passionate scientists which work on SBI for many years. Fortune-hunters are joining the gang as they smell success. That's the situation right now
The reason why I believe SBI is seminal is that it proves that natural neural networks and even single cells, not necessarily neurons, behave in accordance with clearly defined mathematical rules, which enable us to (a) predict and program the behaviour and morphogenesis of living tissue, organs and organisms, (b) to create synthetic forms of life (minds) which never exist, (c) create mathematical, in silica and other substrate based minds which will perform like or better than biological ones, (d) integrate seamlessly all SBIs across the entire array of substrates.
All these things can be done by scientists in labs or by SBI itself as it evolves if we allow it to do it.
Active inference theory and minds everywhere framework based on it both show that there is no such thing as unintelligent life. All life forms, organs, and even single cells have intelligence on a spectrum.
I don't know how to better estimate the probability. SBI is here. Its probability is 1.
Noah, I've made a very short original submission paper following your advise. Thank's once again https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/Js4uiJEahHhQBKE3h/agi-will-arrive-by-the-end-of-this-decade-either-as-a
You are right. Early Pavlov's ideas of stimulus-response learning and conditioning were not ignored. I had to be more specific that the latest idea of Pavlov about stimulus-stimulus learning was ignored. I'm working on a short paper that will summarise the book's findings and will try to be more clear in it
Thank you very much for your feedback. I value you advise