“It is impossible to speak in such a way as to not be misunderstood” Karl Popper Intro This worldview combines the teachings of Karl Popper and David Deutsch with my own understandings. I attempt to explain areas where we need to improve our knowledge, before a genuine AGI is capable...
I’m was inspired to enter this contest to shed light on a worldview that may influence Future Fund's plans regarding AGI. Future Funds listed three ideas bellow. I think the last possibility is where their focus should continue. “As a result, we think it's really possible that: * all of...
“It is impossible to speak in such a way as to not be misunderstood”
Karl Popper
This worldview combines the teachings of Karl Popper and David Deutsch with my own understandings. I attempt to explain areas where we need to improve our knowledge, before a genuine AGI is capable of being programmed to think, comprehend, create explanations and create knowledge. My take is that all the fear surrounding AGI is unnecessary. The common pessimistic themes are empirical, Bayesian induction and prophecy and not an image of what will happen in reality.
I cannot include everything in this article. There are too many places that need deeper explanations. Rather, this will be an introduction to my... (read 3854 more words →)
This is wonderful, you have identified the crux of the conflict. And identifying conflicts is a great thing. We each have a different understanding of how science works. At the root of it, it’s a cases of Popperian Epistemology vs Bayesian Epistemology.
This is how I understand Bayesianism. Bayesianism works on a spectrum, on one end I don’t see a problem with it, on the other end it breaks. One end includes finite problems, like probabilities of winning in poker, the other end, we introduce new unpredictable things into the game (this is our reality), and Bayesian induction can’t work.
People who don’t know about Poppers refutation of Bayesian Induction, or don’t understand it.... (read more)
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t Bayesian induction claim we can be more confident we are right based on more evidence?
The method I have come to understand comes from Karl Popper, which is, we improve our knowledge through conjecture and criticism (the elimination of errors from our best held knowledge). Not by the probability of being closer to truth.
I’m was inspired to enter this contest to shed light on a worldview that may influence Future Fund's plans regarding AGI. Future Funds listed three ideas bellow. I think the last possibility is where their focus should continue.
“As a result, we think it's really possible that:
I’m apprehensive about submitting this worldview, which disregards probabilities. This is a contest judged by super forecasters (our cultures prophets), about probabilities (our cultures prophesies); And I’m... (read 2422 more words →)