fagin
Philosopher
Perhaps he means his own?
I didn't know bots were capable of sarcasm.
Super Artificial Intelligence, a naive approach
- Thread starter ProgrammingGodJordan
- Start date
I didn't know bots were capable of sarcasm.
ProgrammingGodJordan
Banned
Valid point. I shall ignore irrelevant posts.
Aridas
Crazy Little Green Dragon
Generally speaking, if you're going to try to minimize ignorance via a forum, you should be focusing on communication, paying close attention to what you're actually saying and to what others are actually saying. Your track record when it comes to both is somewhat horrendous, already. That's before getting to any of the specifics.
As for what ignorance you think that you're minimizing, specifically... do you really think that anyone here isn't well acquainted with the fact that there have been exponential advances with regards to computing technology over the past couple decades and that AI creation has also been advancing very quickly as well, just for starters?
wollery
Protected by Samurai Hedgehogs!
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2003
- Messages
- 11,308
fagin
Philosopher
Presumably those you believe are irrelevant?
ProgrammingGodJordan
Banned
I aim to minimize my ignorance...
Moore's Law, hey. That one where we get a doubling in performance of silicon chips every two years? The right law, I take it?
OK, well, let's have a look. 2020 is 3 years away. At the moment you're own figures for computer performance has the best of them at 10^14 (somethings), which is one ten-thousandth of the level of humans, again, according to your own figures. Applying Moore's Law to those figures suggest computers will be at around approximately 3 ten-thousandths of that of humans by 2020. In fact, by applying Moore's Law alone, it looks as though it will take computers approx. 15 years to get to that same level, or approx. 2032.
As I probably said before, you just make **** up.
Last edited:
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2010
- Messages
- 32,124
8, surely?
2017 = 1 = 1
2018 = 1 * 2 = 2
2019 = 2 * 2 = 4
2020 = 4 * 2 = 8
Possibly 16, since the 1014 figure was probably derived in 2016.
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
Aim harder.
ProgrammingGodJordan
Banned
(A)
Using Moore's Law equation -> HBS = CMS * 2^n (HBS=human_brain_speed | CMS=current_machine_speed | n = YEARS_TILL_BRAIN_CHIP/rate | rate = 2)
Using more precise figures (as provided in original post source) we have:
(2*10^15)/(6.4*10^14) = 2^(YEARS_TILL_BRAIN_CHIP/2)
YEARS_TILL_BRAIN_CHIP = 3.28771
(B)
ESTIMATED_YEAR_OF_BRAIN_CHIP = 2017 + 3.28771
Outcome is 2020, roughly.
Last edited:
baron
Unregistered
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2006
- Messages
- 8,627
That's a quadruple negative, isn't it?
Actually you're right...
Last edited:
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
LOL
Well, even if that were the case, it's hardly 10,000, is it. Moore's Law applies to every 2 years*, so I simply assumed this year as the starting year, 2019 as the first doubling, then a bit more for 2020 (I didn't want to bother with log tables).
*It appears you are assuming a doubling every year, not every other year.
OK, so a doubling every 2 years gets us how far in 3 years?
Righto then. Go away and work out why this nonsense is wrong, then report back here when you know.
ProgrammingGodJordan
Banned
There was a typo in my answer via reply 91, but I had edited to 3.28 instead of 3.125.
Anyway, we still have 2017+3.28, which gives roughly 2020.
Here is the long workout, to show that I am not "conjuring up any weird fake math process":
FORMULAE : HBS = CMS * 2^n
HBS=human_brain_speed
CMS=current_machine_speed
n = YEARS_TILL_BRAIN_CHIP/rate
RATE = 2
So,
HBS = 2*10^15
CMS = 6.4*10^14
So,
(2*10^15) = (6.4*10^14) * 2^(YEARS_TILL_BRAIN_CHIP/2)
(2*10^15)/(6.4*10^14) = ( (6.4*10^14) * 2^(YEARS_TILL_BRAIN_CHIP/2) )/(6.4*10^14)
(2*10^15)/(6.4*10^14) = 2^(YEARS_TILL_BRAIN_CHIP/2)
3.125 = root (2^YEARS_TILL_BRAIN_CHIP)
YEARS_TILL_BRAIN_CHIP = 3.28
So, we roughly have 3.28 + CURRENT_YEAR, which gives us roughly 2020., contrary to your "calculations".
Last edited:
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2010
- Messages
- 32,124
You're right, I thought it was 1, but it's not.
... in any case it seems Moore's law no longer applies as we start to impinge on physical limits.
It's interesting that in the OP there was a factor of somewhere between 100 and 10000 between human brain and machines and yet in ProgrammingGodJordan's calculation that suddenly dropped to a factor of 3
What happened ?
It's interesting that in the OP there was a factor of somewhere between 100 and 10000 between human brain and machines and yet in ProgrammingGodJordan's calculation that suddenly dropped to a factor of 3
What happened ?
... .....It's interesting that in the OP there was a factor of somewhere between 100 and 10000 between human brain and machines and yet in ProgrammingGodJordan's calculation that suddenly dropped to a factor of 3
What happened ?
He moved the goalposts, hoping no-one would notice.:
Suddenly, for the purposes of this calculation, humans have the brain power of a chimp. He has altered the figure from (10^16 to 10^18) to 10^15, suddenly meaning we only have to make machines 10 times more powerful to get to our level.
Of course, as having a brain of power 10^18 was a requirement to qualify as a god, he has just completely undermined his humans-are-gods argument. Humans, chimps, dolphins, dogs, pigs and possibly parrots too* now qualify as gods under the new revised criteria.
* I can't be bothered checking.
From K for example!!!!!