Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
WCDT: 2281-85 (24-28 September 2012) Weekly Comics Discussion Thread
Akima:
--- Quote from: Is it cold in here? on 28 Sep 2012, 18:54 ---People need to understand why some problems will defy any amount of computing power thrown at them, and why using software to analyze software has unfixable limitations.
--- End quote ---
Mmm... But that is just as true of human computing power and human software as that running in a sentient artificial intelligence. Or to put it another way, such problems would be no less amenable to solution by an AI if it really were intelligent at a human level at least.
--- Quote from: no one special on 29 Sep 2012, 00:40 ---a) Do we know that AI are self-sustaining?<snip>
b) Maybe AI don't yet know how to create themselves at all.<snip>
c) Not all branches of computer science would lead directly to AI development.<snip>
--- End quote ---
On a) and b), I think we can be reasonably sure that AI are capable of creating and sustaining themselves, or Hannelore would not have regarded the fact that "they like us" as so fortunate.
As for c), I'm sure there would be other applications of Computer Science than AI development, but why would we assume that humans would be as good at any aspect of the field as AIs? Because humans are special? With the advent of truly sentient, self replicating artificial intelligences, maybe not so much. Some areas of CS, like compiler-design, might become completely redundant. Why would an AI need a compiler at all? Once upon a time even humans wrote machine code directly, and it doesn't take much digging to find grey-muzzled old programmers who will assure you that they wrote more efficient code that way too!
There is a poem (or maybe it's a song?) called "John Henry The Steel-Driving Man" where a man competes with hand tools against a steam-hammer in drilling through a mountain and kills himself in the attempt. I suppose once John Henry was supposed to seem heroic, but nowadays the idea that a man with a hammer or a spade would even try to compete in such a task with powered machinery seems rather ridiculous and pathetic. It might be that the advent of AI minds might make competing with them at computer-science similarly futile.
Or maybe not. Even in our world, where computers are well short of sentience, the arrival of computers that can beat the strongest human chess players some of the time, has not stopped people playing chess. Even if computers were developed that could defeat all human players in every game, people would probably still play against each other, and by studying the games of the computer champions improve their own play. There are, after all, human weiqi players I would have no chance of beating, and yet I still play and enjoy the game, and study the games of the professional champions. If (or rather when) computer players can reliably defeat those human champions, I doubt I will give up the game. Humans compete in marathon foot-races despite being wholly uncompetitive over that distance with motor cars. Perhaps we don't have to be the best at something to find it a worthwhile subject of study.
pwhodges:
--- Quote from: Akima on 30 Sep 2012, 04:07 ---Once upon a time even humans wrote machine code directly, and it doesn't take much digging to find grey-muzzled old programmers who will assure you that they wrote more efficient code that way too!
--- End quote ---
You don't need to look that far ;) (and yes, I know you don't mean mere assembly code).
jwhouk:
So many options... What are you looking forward to?
More Marigold Awkward Sex Talk! 6 (8.2%)
More Claire/Clinton Fighting! 4 (5.5%)
Hannelore Draws Moar Kittehs! 8 (11%)
Marten Is Amused! 9 (12.3%)
Faye and Angus - The Beginning of The End! 4 (5.5%)
Dora/Tai - The Next Day! 18 (24.7%) <== What we all wanted.
Emily and Gabby do something weird! 11 (15.1%) <== What we got.
Another New Meme Attempt! 4 (5.5%)
An Old Meme Returns! (Waffles! Spathe Ham! LASERS!) 1 (1.4%)
Hitting the F5 key repeatedly to see if Jeph's updated the strip yet! 8 (11%)
Total Members Voted: 73
Method of Madness:
--- Quote from: iduguphergrave on 29 Sep 2012, 12:11 ---And yes, he was gay. It doesn't come up in the books because again, we see Dumbledore through Harry's eyes and Harry sees him as teacher/mentor/father. Also, at 140+ years old, he's slightly past the age for romance. But in the last book, he reveals his friendship with Grindelwald and it's pretty easy to see that it was infatuation on Dumbledores part. In fact it's implied that the reason Dumbledore never tried for love again was because of what happened with Grindelwald.
/Potterhead
--- End quote ---
That's an interesting point. It's also based on canon, so thank you. I guess I didn't notice it, I haven't reread the book since "the announcement" and when I first read it I was kind of rushing through to get to the end. I'm not sure if I'm convinced entirely, but it's more convincing than "the author said so".
--- Quote from: Skewbrow on 30 Sep 2012, 03:58 ---
--- Quote from: cesium133 on 29 Sep 2012, 23:17 ---Cornbread are square.
--- End quote ---
So will my age be in two days time :-\
--- End quote ---
My age turned square about a month ago.
Is it cold in here?:
Akima's point is only a special case of the wider question of why humans do anything at all in the QC universe. There must be very few jobs that a human can do better than an AI.
Jeph has said in the past that enough AIs are moving into companion jobs or replacing non-sentient machines, or are just plain lazy, that there are still jobs left for humans.
Ohh, here's a creative one. What if the AIs fund computer science education for humans so that humans become better conversation partners?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version