Skip navigation

Tag Archives: technology

A few weeks ago i stumbled upon Scott Aaronson’s post called “The Toaster-enhanced Turing Machine”. As you might guess from my title, i misunderstood what it meant. But, actually, i really liked the thing i understood instead, so i’ll post my own version. Which is:

A Turing-machine enhanced toaster is just a Turing-machine.

Read More »

Mark Zuckerberg, founder and CEO of Facebook

Mark Zuckerberg (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

As i said elsewhere, FaceBook as an advertising company does not work. It is just stupid. Because no one looks at the ads in FB, we try the best we can to not notice the ads, and the more they capture our attention the worse the site is. That is just the opposite of what happens with Google, the best the ads the best the search results. So FB should try to become a better FB, and through that go get money. One possible recipe follows. Read More »

The first time you create a wallpaper for your desktop, you don’t really know what you are doing. You end up with too much photoshop effects. And probably a jpg you unduly expanded to subsequently blur and unsharp. You know. You did too. So did i. That’s not the point, though. At first the wallpapers are supposed to be ouvres in themselves, but as time goes by and you get more control, you start creating images that fit with the icons you have there, that you see every day.

So the familiarity brings some strains to the work, some structure. It makes one wonder: Does renaissance painting cue us to the painters’ social position? Does it reveal, for example, a duality between the themes in the paintings selected by priests (St. Anthony’s martyrdom) and the existential attitude subtly intertweened there in the painting technique (each living being is an unwavering beam of light)?

And if so, what was the point of the work, again?

Posted by Wordmobi

Sam Hughes of after some frustration with some transhumanist hypothesized about how creating better-than human AI to create better-than-better-than-human AI and so on is impossible. Big discussion ensues, he ends up closing the post seemingly conceding defeat. I do not agree with his arguments, but i agree wholeheartedly with his conclusions. If that does not prove i am not qualified to talk about intelligence then what does? ;-)

Nevertheless. AI. The subject seems pretty hot ATM. What i think.

Basically, i hold “explosive AI” to be possible, in a theoretical kind of way, but for it to actually happen in our civilization’s time frame would call for tech breakthroughs on par with warp-drive or time-travel. To put it another way: common-AI is already trivial in our present, but this technology can’t progress into the general 42 that transhumanists expect. Read More »