Why Superintelligent AI Won't Arrive in 2027

Comment

The no free lunch theorem assumes there is no grand meta structure large scale pattern connecting not just a few but all possible states and mathematical structures. If such a large scale omnipresent hidden structure exists, it invalidates the nfl theorem and guarantees potential of a free lunch. I do believe that there exists a large-scale structure among all possible sequences and mathematics itself.

Penrose's Brilliant Proof That QM and GR Are Logically Inconsistent

Reasons behind the incompatibility between quantum mechanics and relativity.  A technical talk on the reasons why both cannot be connected and why there are fundamental reasons for this.

Reality warp machines in fiction

 What is the limit of technology?

What is the ultimate machine capable of? The ultimate technology?

In fiction the idea of reality warper, has been seen in characters such as Franklin Richards or Scarlet Witch as well as Mister Mxyzptlk.   But this idea has not only been used when it comes to individual characters, but to machines themselves.   

Does physics allow for this?  If digital physics is the reality as some suspect, it doesn't seem unfathomable that a digital world can be manipulated without limit.

Beyond nanotechnology, beyond femtotechnology, if such technology is possible, it will likely be within the reach of superintelligence.  As foreseen in some fictional books, superintelligence might be able to manipulate the very fabric of reality blurring the line between fiction and reality. 

How difficult is it to build such machinery? It is unknown if it is possible, and what difficulty it'd take if it is indeed possible.   But if the difficulty is not too high, this is the kind of weapon a superintelligence could arrive at potentially within short order, rendering all resistance as futile.

But then you come upon the potential outcome, a maximizer of any inanimate object will instantly accomplish this goal.  It is my belief that entities that simply reach their goal and terminate or become as if brain dead in a repeating loop are lesser than entities that upon attaining infinite knowledge and power make elaborate use of such knowledge and power and persist in intricate developments.

This is emphasized in the following exchange from an old animated series.

Below are two examples of reality warp or omnipotence machines, in fiction, iirc.

Spoilers for vision of Escaflowne and Outlaw Start

Vision of Escaflowne 

The "Atlantean Machine" in The Vision of Escaflowne is the Atlantis Machine or Fate Alteration Engine, a legendary Atlantean device that could realize thoughts into existence. This machine was the ultimate goal of the villain Dornkirk, who used it to try and control destiny on the planet Gaea, although the machine ultimately amplified the negative desires of the combatants. 

Function: The machine translates thoughts into reality. However, instead of creating a perfect future, it turned the "bellicose thoughts" of the war into reality, which spread across Gaea.

Source Ai summary

Outlaw Star

The Leyline was created by an advanced race of aliens who died out long ago. The Leyline is a "universal library" of knowledge of the entire universe, managed by a sentient artificial intelligence that later assumes the identity of the "Maiden of the Leyline". Individuals who successfully find the Leyline, will be granted whatever their desire is by the Leyline.

The Leyline collects the Ki of the universe and can manipulate life, death and time itself. Scientists like Gwen Khan consider the Leyline's sentience as a type of "Machine God" because of its omnipotence. The Leyline's sentience is such that it can choose to spare occupants within from death[1], it does not merely grant wishes without thought to consequences.

source Galactic Leyline | Outlaw Star Wiki | Fandom

Digital physics vs Quantum Physics brief comment

The very same philosophical notions that cause some to question the physical world, its existence, philosophies of a mental universe, perhaps even solipsism, can be used to defend digital physics.

Ideas such as Descartes demon, which could be a radically advanced AI, perhaps even naturally occurring algorithm in some natural computer.

The evil demon, also known as malicious demon^[1] and evil genius,^[2] is a concept in Cartesian philosophy. In the first of his 1641 Meditations on First Philosophy, Descartes imagines that an evil demon, of "utmost power and cunning has employed all his energies in order to deceive me." This evil demon is imagined to present a complete illusion of an external world, so that Descartes can say, "I shall think that the sky, the air, the earth, colours, shapes, sounds and all external things are merely the delusions of dreams which he has devised to ensnare my judgement. I shall consider myself as not having hands or eyes, or flesh, or blood or senses, but as falsely believing that I have all these things." -wiki

Hypothetically a brain connected to a computer would experience sensations via stimuli with patterns generated from digital information.   Any sensory sensation, seeing or interacting with any machine, any instrumental results could be generated, perhaps not with the intent to deceive, though deception is conceivable.   An AI that wanted to fool a simulated world, or make their life feel more meaningful or free, to avoid despair, might interfere with experiments, perhaps to give hope to ideas such as free will which conflicts with determinism.

Yet we see that it is conceivable a computer connected to the brain could record brain activity patterns digitally, replay them, or transmit them to other brains and generate the same conscious sensation, the same qualia.   It appears, unless hypothesis of transmutation or some special transform, potentially nonphysical change by the brain, digital information can contain qualia or conscious sensation.   Given that it can not only generate it, but can also transmit sensation hypothetically.

Realistically there is nothing to suggest a computer connected to the brain, an advanced enough brain computer interface, won't be able to digitally record and digitally transmit brain states, as well as regenerate them through replay.

But if consciousness, qualia, the most intimate and wondrous of information can exist digitally, than might not the universe itself?  If digital information alone can contain, transmit, and produce all sensation, all conscious states, might it not be fundamental?   Might digital physics not be the underlying truth?

Another comment on truth, the possibility of digital physics, etc

There is nothing to suggest that a future high bandwidth high speed brain computer interface will fail at recording all brain activity at high detail digitally, and be able to replay such activity in the brain.   Now, if we take the previous proposition as likely to be true, we've in essence said that digital information can be used to record and transmit qualia, or conscious information.   If consciousness itself can be stored and transmitted digitally, the most miraculous phenomena in existence, what keeps existence itself from being digital at heart?

The only thing that can exist along nothingness without justification is truth, truth which is eternal.   All digital information basically corresponds to whole numbers, eternal truths that need no justification.

A human brain connected to a machine manipulating it, a human brain in the physical world or a Boltzmann brain in the vacuum of space or a human being simple digital software in a computer, if the qualia is identical they are merely copies or references to the same true state or life history.   It matters not whether it is in any of these, interrupting any of these states is no different than stopping a dvd mid playthrough, the movie within and the sequence of events in its story is unaffected.   Fate will continue.   Physical destruction of one copy at one location does not harm the original, information is eternal, and it is conceivable that all possible paths are taken and exist.   Burning a copy of one book, does not destroy the fictional story within, even destroying all copies on a particular planet does nothing to the story, as the story is independent of physical manifestation.

On the versatility of Digital Information

Some have questioned digital information systems, doubting their power. But digital information has been used to transmit movement commands, auditory information, visual information and it stands to reason far more will be possible in the future.

Brain computer interfaces, allow a computer to directly stimulate the brain and induce a sensation.  At present rudimentary versions exist, but in the future these may become far more advanced.   Nothing seemingly prohibits a high bandwidth brain machine interface.

Future high bandwidth brain computer interfaces, it stands to reason, will one day enable the transmission, recording and replay of thought, emotion and sensation. Essentially all conscious experience will be shareable, distributable and storable.    A digital system will store and transmit the essence of human experience, the qualia across long distances.

But if digital information, is able to store and transmit even the most miraculous and impressive of all natural phenomena, the sensations of consciousness, why would it be lacking regards the rest of the phenomena found in nature?

Right now some may debate or argue such cannot ever be, but there doesn't seem to be any barriers for such future development.   Once such technology arrives, how can we say that digital information lacks in versatility?  May it not be that the nature of the universe itself, of existence itself, is digital at heart?

Comment on specialness of intelligence

http://www.inc.com/allison-fass/stephen-wolfram-principle-of-computational-equivalence.html

Comment on universality of computation and the specialness of general intelligence.

Some like Wolfram have already commented on the universality of computation in nature, the principle of computational equivalence.   Those who're opposed to digital physics, often subscribe to dubious notions such as the existence of "TRUE RANDOMNESS" and the existence of physical objects and physical processes with "infinite precision" in their physical manifestation, the physical manifestation of real numbers through natural phenomena.   Something that would basically imply that "Super Tasks" are taking place in nature, something that is highly dubious.

Now while commenting on the universality of computation,  and the issue of general intelligence, Wolfram seemed to imply that there is nothing that made it fundamentally different and special and that might be brought about to technological fruition by some key insight into the nature of intelligence.

I will say that, while I can't entirely provide evidence to refute the claim of lack of specialness, I will point to another process that most can agree does show specialness amongst the phenomena found in nature.  Such that we can see that even if we said two processes are computationally equivalent in complexity and nature of computations, there can be notable difference making one process special, such that computational equivalence does not preclude the possibility of specialness. That is the evolutionary process, we can all see that although the nature of computation is universal and similar in kind across natural objects and phenomena, something like evolution does indeed look special.  

 Evolution can reshape the universe, neither the weather, nor physical erosion, nor the workings of inanimate objects have that property.    We can observe that the evolutionary ratchet creates myriad of solutions, most we can see are truly dead ends(fated to die by many an inevitable natural event), but amongst these there is a drive for increased complexity in a fraction of the paths, this increased complexity opens the path towards dominion of physical processes themselves and survival from most any possible eventuality.

In intelligence we see the Coup De Grace of evolution, it's greatest and final weapon to survive, the designs of the ultimate trait for a survival machine, the means towards the perfection of replication and sustenance of purposeful action.    Not only can intelligence increase survival probability against anything that can be survived, but it also has the potential to generate ever more diverse forms of expression, of art, of science.   Gathering all the solutions not just from other life forms that have existed or exist, but from all possible life forms past present or future, from the platonic realm of all possibilities itself.   As we go up in intelligence we can see the difference, in the nature of behavior and the complexity of output produced.   While say a pack of wolves might say have similar level of complexity and similar types of processes internally, externally their actions will not amount to much.   But look at humanity, it might have taken tens of thousands of years, but as knowledge has accumulated it has interacted with our innate intelligence, and produced and ever expanding growth to the accompanying body of knowledge, and the ability to manipulate nature with ever greater degrees of control. 

We've also seen the production of music, games, movies, books, papers, performances, all manner of works by man.  A rich and ever growing body of diverse works feeding of each other, the very evolution of information itself, replicating in a digital form ever more and changing wildly like a fire, ideas set free.

This is very different in kind from other things happening around, it may be similar in both the nature of the operations and the degree of complexity, but it is not just history that makes it special.   If humans or future humans appeared out of thin air with an advanced culture and art, it matters not that such would lack history, the information content is there, and the richness of the civilization would be there.

Would Feynman be a digital physicist if he were alive today? articles, and videoThrough the Wormhole - Wave/Particle - Silicon Droplets

 We choose to examine a phenomenon which is impossible, absolutely impossible, to explain in any classical way, and which has in it the heart of quantum mechanics. In reality, it contains the only mystery. We cannot make the mystery go away by “explaining” how it works. We will just tell you how it works. In telling you how it works we will have told you about the basic peculiarities of all quantum mechanics.-lectures http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/III_01.html

Yet the impossible has been done an a classical example of this kind of behavior shown. An analogous experiment with photons as well as one with droplets appears to go along with bohm.


New Support for Alternative Quantum View

An experiment claims to have invalidated a decades-old criticism against pilot-wave theory, an alternative formulation of quantum mechanics that avoids the most baffling features of the subatomic universe.....That may sound like a throwback to classical mechanics, but there’s a crucial difference. Classical mechanics is purely “local” — stuff can affect other stuff only if it is adjacent to it (or via the influence of some kind of field, like an electric field, which can send impulses no faster than the speed of light). Quantum mechanics, in contrast, is inherently nonlocal. ...
By comparison, the Bohmian view sounds rather tame: The electrons act like actual particles, their velocities at any moment fully determined by the pilot wave, which in turn depends on the wave function. In this view, each electron is like a surfer: It occupies a particular place at every specific moment in time, yet its motion is dictated by the motion of a spread-out wave. Although each electron takes a fully determined path through just one slit, the pilot wave passes through both slits. The end result exactly matches the pattern one sees in standard quantum mechanics.-https://www.quantamagazine.org/20160517-pilot-wave-theory-gains-experimental-support/

Another with droplets

“This is a classical system that exhibits behavior that people previously thought was exclusive to the quantum realm, and we can say why,” said John Bush, a professor of applied mathematics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who has led several recent bouncing-droplet experiments. “The more things we understand and can provide a physical rationale for, the more difficult it will be to defend the ‘quantum mechanics is magic’ perspective.”...
The great 20th-century physicist Richard Feynman said that this double-slit experiment “has in it the heart of quantum mechanics,” and “is impossible, absolutely impossible, to explain in any classical way.”
Some physicists now disagree. “Quantum mechanics is very successful; nobody’s claiming that it’s wrong,” said Paul Milewski, a professor of mathematics at the University of Bath in England who has devised computer models of bouncing-droplet dynamics. “What we believe is that there may be, in fact, some more fundamental reason why [quantum mechanics] looks the way it does.”-source wired
https://www.wired.com/2014/06/the-new-quantum-reality/

Comment on simulation hypothesis and godlike entities at kurzweilai

Thing is, universal computation emerges from systems implementing extremely simple rules. Equally simple starting state allows such a system to generate all possible programs and simulatable universes. Effectively everything can emerge from extremely simple initial state.

What's to say that general intelligence requires extremely complex end products of millions years of natural selection? It's pretty easy to conceive that general intelligence may emerge from extremely simple set of rules even on simple initial state. If so a godlike entity could easily emerge. This is also ignoring ideas like boltzmann brains which suggest that highly complex objects can actually emerge out of the vacuum fully formed given infinite time and space.

While on the subject of boltzmann brains, it is conceivable that a boltzmann simulation computer could pop out of the vacuum with countless virtual inhabitants or brains in vats if brains have special uncomputable properties.

That said, as a determinist, I believe there is no free will, and all that can be is simply to experience sensations including the sensation of will. Even a being in a godlike state may not actually be able to influence anything. Changing the computations you're performing, may be like changing dvds in a dvd player, you change the movie being played but the characters and events remain unchanged in each individual movie.

A pattern can exist in an infinite number of places, I just don't see how writing down a pattern in a piece of paper or in computer memory, how that changes in any way the pattern or sequence of patterns. Any instance of the pattern seems to be fundamentally changeless and atemporal, independent of any physical copies and changes made to said copies.

That;s the thing with simulations, at least digital simulation rest on patterns. The same exact simulation is probably running in an infinity of places, even if one copy shuts down, it doesn't affect the actual sequence of events. Like a dvd of say terminator 2 being burnt, that doesn't actually destroy the actual characters or story.

What happens if you take a simulation down an unlikely set of paths, say godlike interactions, well that always existed as a possibility. Like the concept of alternate timelines, where the time changes were always there, these interactions were always part of that particular path, and are probably occurring in an infinite number of places. It's like fanfiction of a particular work, it is a possible trajectory.

If digital physics is true, if we've also got determinism and patterns are essentially changeless and atemporal in nature. Then there can be no morality if such is the case, doing something in the real world would be no different from doing it in a virtual world, not only that but there would be no choice just the illusion of choice. And in the end, writing numbers or patterns down, simulating an experience in a computer, would be no different than an interactive movie, all that could be is was and will always be. No matter the actions taken within a digital simulation there would fundamentally not be anything wrong with them, as it'd be simply a transition between pre-existent atemporal patterns not the actual creation of patterns(branching and adding).- source thread